IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No. 8873 of 2010 Date of decision: 30.03.2011 Daya Devi ...Petitioner Versus D.H.B.V.N. etc. ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH Present: Mr. D.S. Bishnoi, Advocate for Mr. Manoj Chahal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. R.S. Kundu, Advocate for the respondents. RANJIT SINGH J. The husband of the petitioner was appointed as T-mate on work charge basis on 01.02.1972. He was promoted as Driver w.e.f. 18.11.1980. He died on 16.07.1990. The petitioner, thereafter, was appointed on compassionate ground and was granted gratuity. In the present petition, the petitioner has made claim for grant of family pension, which has been declined primarily on the ground that the petitioner was work charge employee and, hence, would not be entitled to pension. The objection as raised in the written statement appears to be contrary to the law laid down by the Full Bench in the case of Kesar Chand Versus State of Punjab through the Secretary, PWD (B& R), Chandigarh and others 1988 (2) PLR 223. Faced with this situation, the State counsel submits that the respondents are prepared to reconsider the claim of the petitioner in the light of settled position of law. The writ petition is, accordingly, Civil Writ Petition No. 8873 of 2010 -2- disposed of with the direction to the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioner for grant of pension in terms of settled law. Let the case be considered and decided within the period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Payment becoming due, if any, be released to the petitioner within the aforementioned period. March 30, 2011 (RANJIT SINGH ) rts JUDGE