IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.5974 of 2005 MOST.JAYA DEVI W/o- Late Ladhu Paswa resident of village + P.O. Rannuchak P.S. Nath Nagar District-Bhagalpur. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR through its Chief Secretary Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 2. D.G.P. Bihar, Patna. 3. A.G.Bihar, Patna. 4. I.G. Bhagalpur. 5. S.S.P. Bhagalpur. 6. Provident Fund Officer, Bhagalpur. 7. The District Magistrate, Bhagalpur. ---------- 8 03.02.2010 Heard Mrs. Pravina Kumari (Rai) learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State. The petitioner is a widow of late Ladhu Paswan who died in harness while holding the post of Chaukidar on 26.8.1990 in the Nath Nagar P.S. Bhagalpur. The writ petition has been filed for payment of the family pension and the retiral benefits of late husband of the petitioner together with interest as admissible under the Rules. A counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent No.7, the Circle Officer, Nathnagar, Bhagalpur refers to the payments made to the petitioner. It is stated that it is only in the year, 1990 that the Government 2 of Bihar considered to bring the Choukidar within the category of pensionable service, as earlier they were working on daily wage basis. The said post was made pensionable with effect from 1.1.1990 and the petitioner expired on 26.8.1990. It is stated that the necessary directions for authorization of the death-cum- retiral gratuity and for payment of family pension was issued by the Accountant General, Bihar, Patna on 19.4.2006, copy whereof is placed at Annexures A and B to the said affidavit. The petitioner was found entitled for payment of Rs. 1500/- by way of gratuity and out of which Rs. 1350/- was paid to her by way of provisional gratuity and balance of Rs. 150/- was to be paid to the petitioner and who was also authorized to draw family pension at the rate of Rs. 375/-. In so far as the claim of the G.P.F. and group insurance is concerned, it is stated that as per records no deduction was made from the salary of the petitioner’s husband and as such no amount is admissible towards the said due. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that neither there is any affidavit nor any information as regarding the claim of the 3 petitioner for payment of group insurance. Learned counsel further submits that the retiral dues has been paid to the petitioner after a lapse of 14 years and thus she is also entitled for interest on the belated payment(s). Having regard to the circumstances set forth this writ petition is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to raise her claim as regarding group insurance and interest on belated payment of family pension and gratuity before the respondent No.7, the District Magistrate, Bhagalpur together with documents and Rules /circular on the issue and who would consider and dispose of the same in accordance with law. Needless to add that if the claim is found admissible to the petitioner it should be paid to her within a period of three months from the date of filing of such representation. However, if the same is not found admissible it should be rejected by a reasoned order. This writ petition is disposed of. Bibhash (Jyoti Saran, J.)