H? ^ HIGHCOURTOFCHHATTISGARHATBIL^PUR Writ Petition fS)No. 3368 6f 2008 Petitioner Versus Respondsnts 1. 2. 3. 4. Smt. Sunna Bai, Wd/o Late Pramod Kumar Dewangan, aged about 42 years, Rto. Village Alararpara, Balod, Tehsi! Batod, Djsirict- Duig (C.G^ Stats of Chhaffisgarh, Through the Secretary, Public Wocks Departrnent, D.K.S. Bhawan, Mantralaya. Raipur C.G. ' . ' ' ' '; ' • Engineer in Chlef, Public Works Department. Raipur, C.G. Chiaf Engineer, Public Worl® Departnent, Raipur, C.G. Executive Engtiieer, Publjc Woriesi Departinent, Balod DMsiori, Dtetrtet Duig,C.G. WRIT reTITOIiy UMDERARTIGLE 226 OF THE CQNS7}TUno6T^IND(A Ciingle Bench: Hon'bte Mr. Satish K. Agnihotrj, J. Shri A!ok Devangan, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri ^jay Dwivedi, DeputyGovt Advocate forthe respondenls, ORALORDER (Passedon this 1stday of Juty, 2008} With theconssnt of leamed counselappearingforthe parttesthe matter is heard finally. Leamed counse! appearing fcr the petitioner subtnite that the husband of the petitioner was woridng as Time Keeper in the Public Works Department sjnce 14.5.1987. He was posted in the office of the Executive Engineer, Balod Division, District Durg. The services of ths peStioner's husband was regularized vide order dated 30.11.1993. The petitiorier's husband died on 9.2.2(X)1. Thus, the petitioner, being wife of late Pramod Kumar Dewansan, isentified to grant offamily pension on account of death of her husband. 2. Jfi- '"-^ S*!^ :s~'i. 3. 5. <-T-^ • ; ;1 Learned coynsel further submits that the question of law astp whether /'..'. . '.. • . . ' : • ' the pefitioner js entitled to farnily pension or not is v/etl setUed by this Court in the mattsr Gf M. A. Hakim Vs. State ofMadhya Pradesh (now C.G.) and others (Writ Petition No. 4135/2(X)4), wherein this Court has passed theorderon 28.8.2006, allowing the pettion. It is next contsndsdthattheStateGovt.haspreferredSRecialLeavePeStionNo. 19728/2006 before the Hon'bte Supreine Court against the said order dated28;8.2006andthssamewa3dismissedon 8.12.2006. , Leamed counsel appearing foFffierespondetrts/Statesubnlitsffiat^ft^ questionoflawinvOhredinSiispetJtionisklenticaltoUiatofjnthematter of M.A.Hakim (Supra). He ftirthsrsubmits that tfte petition be allowsd subjectto verification offacts. In view of the foregoing, the writ petition stands disposed of in the same terms i.e. admissibte pensjon shall be reteased wittiin a perjod of two monfcs from today, as the husband of the petitioner has died long back on 9.2.2001 .No orderastoeosts. ____—— Sd/- Sadsh K. Agnihotri Judge Thakur .w