1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR. O R D E R S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION No.2549/2002. : : Gulab Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. : : Date of Order 18.2.2009 HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Mr. Gajendra Singh Rathore for Mr.Mannu Bhargava for the petitioner. Mr. Zakir Hussain, Addl.Govt.Counsel for the State. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner, who is widow of an employee serving with the respondents as Sweeper with their Primary Health Center, Narheda District, Jaipur. The late husband of the petitioner was appointed with the respondents on 14.10.1963 and was confirmed in service w.e.f. 1.3.1966. He unfortunately died while serving the respondents on 26.2.1994. At the time of his death he had already rendered services of one year to the respondents. 2 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has invited attention of the Court towards the letter dated 30.3.1996 (Annexure-2) and letter dated 16.4.1996 (Annexure-3) to show that steps were taken by the CMHO to get the pension case completed and the subsequent letter dated 16.4.1996 by which the CMHO, Jaipur forwarded family pension case of the petitioner to Directorate Pension, Jaipur. It was submitted that even though a period of 13 years have gone since the said letter was sent to the Directorate of Pension so far the terminal dues of the services rendered by the late husband of the petitioner have not been paid nor even the family pension pay to the petitioner. Learned counsel has therefore, prayed that the respondents be directed to release of such benefits to the petitioner together with the arrears of family pension with interest @ 24% per annum. 4. Notice of this writ petition was issued to the respondents as far back as on 24.4.2002. Service of notice was affected in the year 2002 itself. Matter has thereafter been listed before the Court on number of occasions and time granted for filing reply, but no reply has been so far filed by the respondents. In fact, when the matter was listed before the Court on 19.1.2009 last opportunity of four weeks 3 was granted to the respondents to file reply to the writ petition and in view of the nature of the controversy involved, it was observed that in case the respondents do not file reply within time the writ petition shall be disposed of on the basis of whatever facts which averred in the writ petition. Till today no reply has been filed and the learned Additional Government Counsel prays for time to file reply. In the facts and circumstances the matter is decided. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has again reiterated what was pleaded in the writ petition and has submitted that till date neither the terminal dues have been paid to the petitioner nor he has been paid family pension. The late husband of the petitioner admittedly served the respondents for almost 13 years. It is a case in which not only the relief which has been prayed deserves to be granted, but the petitioner has also made out a case for grant of cost of litigation. In the result, this writ petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to grant terminal dues to the petitioner towards the services rendered by her husband and also family pension from the date of death of her husband 4 together with amount of Rs.2000/- as cost. Compliance of the judgment be made within three months from the date copy of the judgment is produced before the respondents. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ)J. A.Arora/- Item No.32.