IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN THURSDAY, THE 2ND DECEMBER 2010 / 11TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 2565 of 2009(E) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ T.Y. ANNAMMA, W/O. LATE P.J. GEORGE, (RETD DEO IN EDN. DEPTT), PARAPATTU HOUSE, KARAKONE, ANCHAL, KOLLAM 691 324. BY ADV. SRI.S.MOHANDAS RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPRUAM 695 001. 2. DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, JAGATHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 009. 3. SUB-TREASURY OFFICER, PUNALUR 691 305, 4. ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A & E) KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. M.R. SREELATHA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------ W.P.(C).No.2565 OF 2009 ------------------------------ Dated this the 2nd day of December, 2010 JUDGMENT Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader. The case of the petitioner is the following: The petitioner's husband was involved in a criminal case on the allegation that he misappropriated a sum of Rs.8343/- while working as Headmaster. He was convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for a period of four years. On appeal, the High Court reduced the period of imprisonment to 8 months in respect of three cases altogether. The matter was taken before the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court partly allowed the appeal and imposed a fine of Rs.7000/- on the late husband of the petitioner. It is stated that Rs.7000/- was paid. W.P.(C).No.2565 OF 2009 2 2. Provisional pension was granted to the husband of the petitioner. The petitioner's husband filed WP(C) No.33676 of 2004 praying for a direction to pass final orders on the claim for pensionary benefits made by him. The Writ Petition was disposed of as per Ext.P7 judgment dated 21st February, 2007 directing the Government to pass final orders and to take appropriate action in accordance with law. According to the petitioner, the Government did not pass any final orders. However, it is pointed out by the learned Government Pleader that the Director of Public Instruction passed Ext.P6 order dated 7.2.2008 in which Government letters dated 7.9.2007 and 13.11.2007 are referred to. Ext.P6 reveals that the Government took the view that since the matter is pending before the Supreme Court, the husband of the petitioner was entitled to get provisional pension alone. Accordingly, Ext.P6 order was passed by the Director of Public Instruction according sanction to resume provisional pension under Rule 3 of Part III KSR. W.P.(C).No.2565 OF 2009 3 3. The relief prayed for in the Writ Petition is to issue a direction to the respondents to pay the family pension to the petitioner from 14.8.2008, on the ground that the husband of the petitioner died on 13.8.2008. There is also a prayer to pay the commutation amount of Rs.68,658/- recovered from the provisional pension of the late husband of the petitioner. Yet another prayer made by the petitioner is to pass final orders on the question of eligibility of pension to the late husband of the petitioner from 1.4.1988 and also to disburse the amounts expeditiously. 4. It would appear that the Government did not take a final decision in the matter, even after the direction in Ext.P7 judgment dated 21st February, 2007. The Government directed the resumption of provisional pension on the ground that the appeal filed by the husband of the petitioner was pending before the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court disposed of the appeal and imposed only a fine on the husband of the petitioner. The fine amount was paid. The subsequent developments were not taken W.P.(C).No.2565 OF 2009 4 into account at any point of time by the Government. The question whether the petitioner is entitled to get family pension and if so, at what rate, was also not considered by the Government. In short, the matter requires consideration on several aspects by the Government. A humanitarian approach is needed in the matter. If relaxation of Rules is required, that also can be resorted in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case. The Government shall take a decision in the matter as expeditiously as possible, and at any rate, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the Writ Petition and certified copy of the judgment before the Government. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE. cms