1 WP 5140.2011- [ J ] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 5140 OF 2011 1. Smt. Surekha Sanjay Berad Age : 32 Yrs., Occ. Household, R/o : Mulewadi, Tq. Karjat, Dist. : Ahmednagar. 2. Jayram Sanjay Berad Age : 12 Yrs., Occ. Education, R/o : Mulewadi, Tq. Karjat, Dist. : Ahmednagar Through his natural guardian Mother Surekha Sanjay Barad. .... PETITIONERS V E R S U S 1. Laxman Parvati Berad Age : 75 Yrs., Occ. R/o : Taradgavan, Tq. Shrigonda, Dist. Ahmednagar. 2. Dropadabai Laxman Berad Age : 70 Yrs., Occ. R/o : Taradgavan, Tq. Shrigonda, Dist. Ahmednagar. .... RESPONDENTS Mr. V.S.Badakh, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. N.C.Garud, Advocate for Resp. Nos. 1 & 2. CORAM : S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J. DATE OF JUDGMENT : 22/09/2011 2 WP 5140.2011- [ J ] ORAL JUDGMENT : 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of the learned counsel for the respective parties, taken up for final hearing. 2. Petitioner no. 1 is the widow, petitioner no. 2 is the son and respondent no. 2 is the mother of the deceased Sanjay Berad. On his death, proceedings for issuance of succession certificate were initiated. The succession certificate was granted in favour of the present petitioners and respondent no. 2 giving 1/3rd share each in respect of the amount of family pension, amount of death-cum- retirement gratuity, provident fund and insurance. The parties have accepted the said succession certificate. The Zilla Parishad, Ahmednagar did not grant the amount of family pension to the petitioner no. 1 on the ground that the succession certificate states that the petitioner nos. 1 and 2 and the present respondent no. 2 have 1/3rd share each and as per the scheme and the relevant rules, the mother is not entitled to the family pension. The petitioners moved for the modification of the said succession certificate to the extent of the amount of family pension. The trial court rejected the said application. Aggrieved thereby the present Writ Petition is filed. 3. Heard Mr. Badakh, the learned counsel for the petitioners 3 WP 5140.2011- [ J ] and Mr. N.C. Garud, the learned counsel for the respondent nos. 1 & 2. 4. The factual matrix as referred above is not disputed. Even otherwise, as per the rules, the widow is entitled for the family pension. As such, it would be in nobody’s interest to maintain the succession certificate granting 1/3rd share to the mother in pension. 5. In light of the above, the order of issuance of succession certificate is modified to the extent that as far as amount of family pension is concerned, the same would be receivable by petitioner no. 1. Rest of the order of issuance of succession certificate is maintained. 6. Mr. N.C. Garud, the learned counsel for the respondents submits that the amounts under the different heads as directed by the trial Court is not being disbursed by the authorities. There is no impediment for the authority to disburse the amount in respect of the gratuity, the provident fund, insurance to the respective parties as detailed in the succession certificate issued by the trial court. 7. The department/authorities shall disburse the amount to the petitioner nos. 1 and 2 and respondent no. 2 as per the said succession certificate, save and except, the amount of family pension which would be disbursed to the petitioner no. 1 in toto. 4 WP 5140.2011- [ J ] 8. The amount of the share of petitioner no. 2, whose guardian is petitioner no. 1, shall be kept in fixed deposit in any Nationalized bank and the petitioner no. 1 is entitled to the amount of interest every quarter on the amount. 9. The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. 10. Rule is made absolute in terms of aforesaid observations and directions. No costs. [ S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J.] KNP/WP 5140.2011- [ J ]