(1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD. Civil Application No. 4936 of 2010 (In Writ Petition No. 1323 of 2008) 1. The Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Jalna, Taluka & District : Jalna. 2. The Education Officer, Zilla Parishad, Jalna. .. Applicants. versus Sushilabai w/o. Wamanrao Sonawane, Age : 62 years, Occupation : Household, R/o. Lohara, Taluka : Pachora, District : Jalgaon. .. Non-applicant. ....................... Mr. M.S. Mahajan, Advocate, for the applicants. Mr. K.P. Chaware, Advocate, for the non-applicant. Mr. K.G. Patil, Assistant Government Pleader, appearing for the State. ........................ (2) CORAM : B.R. GAVAI & R.M. BORDE, JJ. DATE : 15TH DECEMBER 2010 COURT'S ORDER (Per R.M. Borde, J.) : 1. By way of present application, the applicants (original respondent nos.1 and 2) are seeking clarification in respect of the order passed by this Court, dated 29th July 2008, in Writ Petition No. 1323/2008, for the purpose of determining date for award of pensionary benefits in favour of the non- applicant (original petitioner). The applicants have also sought extension of time so as to comply the said order passed in Writ Petition No. 1323/2008. 2. Our attention is invited to paragraph 3 of the Government Resolution dated 5th July 1991, which reads thus : " The date of disappearance of the Government servant will be reckoned from the date the First Information Report (FIR) is lodged with the police authorities and the period of one year after which the benefits of family pension and gratuity are to be sanctioned will also be reckoned from this (3) date. In cases where the FIR was lodged prior to issue of these orders, and where the period of one of year has already been elapsed, the benefits like family pension, gratuity will be sanctioned from the date of issue of these orders. " The benefits available to the employees, in terms of the Government Resolution, can be sanctioned from the date of issue of the orders i.e. 5th July 1991. However, the order passed by this Court does not set out clear guidance for the purpose of prescribing date for extending benefits. The order dated 29-7-2008 also allows the parties liberty to approach this Court for further clarification, if occasion arises. Hence this application. 3. The learned Counsel appearing for the non-applicant (original petitioner) has no serious objection for issuing directions for holding the petitioner entitled to secure the benefits from the date of issuance of the Government Resolution dated 5th July 1991. 4. In this view of the matter, the applicants, as well as, the State Government are directed to accord pensionary benefits admissible to the non-applicant (original petitioner), in (4) accordance with paragraph 3 of the Government Resolution dated 5th July 1991. The applicants / State authorities are directed to ensure compliance of the order within a period of three months from today, including payment of the amount receivable by the non-applicant (original petitioner). It is clarified that further extension will not be granted in the matter and this order shall be strictly complied by the applicants. 5. With these directions, the Civil Application is disposed of. ( R.M. BORDE ) ( B.R. GAVAI ) JUDGE JUDGE ......................... bgp/ca4936