D.B. SPECIAL APPEAL (WRIT) NO.1270/2008 Heera Dass & Anr. Vs. Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur & Ors. Date of Judgment :: August 05, 2008. HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.NARAYAN ROY HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Mr. Manoj Pareek for the appellant(s). Mr. Vimal Jain for the respondent(s). *** Heard counsel for the parties. This appeal is directed against order dated 10.3.2008 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in writ petition no.6015/99 whereby and whereunder the writ application of the appellants was dismissed. On death of the deceased employee, Phool Chand Swami, his married sister, respondent no.8-Smt. Geeta Devi approached the State authorities for grant of pensionary benefits to her as she was the nominee of the deceased government employee. Her prayer, however, was declined by the authorities. The matter, ultimately, was taken to the Services Tribunal by the nominee, respondent no.8. The Services Tribunal passed an order directing the authorities to make payment of pensionary benefits including pension, gratuity, GPF amount and insurance amount to the respondent no.8. Ultimately, the same was challenged in writ jurisdiction which was dismissed giving rise to the order impugned. It is admitted fact that the deceased employee had nominated respondent no.8, Smt. Geeta Devi, as his nominee who happened to be his married sister. It is also admitted fact that the deceased employee was unmarried. The appellant claims to be the adopted son -2- of the deceased employee but no evidentiary documents were produced in favour of the same nor any succession certificate was produced before the writ court to show that he was the successor of the deceased government employee to receive the pensionary benefits. The Services Tribunal and also the learned Single Judge of this Court however directed for payment of pensionary benefits to respondent no.8 as she was the nominee of the deceased employee. The nominee, respondent no.8, was none else but the married sister of the deceased employee which is covered by the decision of the government vide F.D. Office Memorandum No.D.7360/F.7A(46) FD-A (Rules)/59-II dated 15.12.1959. The findings recorded by the tribunal and also the learned Single Judge of this Court, in the given facts and circumstances of the case, therefore, cannot be faulted. This appeal, in that view of the matter, does not merit consideration. It is accordingly dismissed. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ),J. (NARAYAN ROY),CJ. Skant/-