IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.20742 of 2006 Date of decision: April 30, 2008. Smt. Sudesh Kumari through LRs ...Petitioner(s) v. State of Punjab & Ors. ...Respondent(s) CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest. Present: Shri Gurcharan Dass, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri M.C. Berry, Additional Advocate General, Punjab for the respondents. ORDER Surya Kant, J. - (Oral): The petitioner's husband, Sada Bahadur, was working as a Senior Clerk in the office of Deputy Commissioner, Ludhiana. He unfortunately expired in harness on 11.10.1984. The petitioner was sanctioned family pension vide PPO No.13816 dated 1.4.1985 though family pension was granted to her with effect from 12.10.1984. The petitioner is also stated to have expired on 14.1.2007. The family pension payable to the petitioner used to be deposited in her account in the Punjab & Sind Bank. The District Treasury Officer, Ludhiana, however, sent a memo dated 27.6.2005 (Annexure P-2), which is addressed to the Manager, Punjab & Sind Bank, Main Branch, Ludhiana as well as different Treasury Officers wherein it is mentioned that the family pensioners who were being paid Dearness Allowance (DA) are not to be given the benefit of DA in case any of the dependent of the deceased employee had been given compassionate appointment. Relying upon this letter, the element of DA payable to the petitioner on family pension has been withdrawn with effect from September, 2005. Aggrieved, she has approached this Court by way of this writ petition. Notice of motion was issued and in response thereto, the respondents have filed their reply affidavit dated 13.11.2007. After explaining the import of the State Govt. instructions dated 4.12.2001, the respondents have further come up with the stand in para 5 of their reply affidavit that in the light of the Punjab Govt. letter dated 28.5.2007, no recovery is being effected from the petitioner. In other words, the respondents do not dispute the fact that from September, 2005 till the new set of instructions dated 28.5.2007 came into force, recovery had actually been effected from the petitioner. If one reads the contents of the impugned letter dated 27.6.2005 (Annexure P-2) issued by the District Treasury Officer, Ludhiana, it stands crystalized that the same pertains to the withdrawal of element of DA to be given on family pension in those cases only where one of the dependent family member of the deceased employee has also been given appointment on compassionate grounds. Admittedly, it is not the case here as no member of the deceased employee's family has been offered appointment on compassionate grounds. The aforesaid instructions, thus, in no circumstance could be applied to her case. For the reasons afore-stated, this writ petition is allowed; the respondents are directed to release the family pension of the petitioner from September 2005 onwards till 14.1.2007, when the petitioner is stated to have expired. The arrears of the family pension, as well as recoveries, if any, shall be paid to the legal heirs of the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. No order as to costs. April 30, 2008. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge