IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.7519 of 2006 Smt.Shaila Devi, aged about 55 years, Wife of Late Keshwar Singh, Constable No.862, R.P.F., resident of Village and P.O. Sasua, P.S. Shahpur, District-Bhojpur ---------------- Petitioner Versus 1. THE UNION OF INDIA through Secretary, Ministry of Railway, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi 2. Director General, R.P.F. Railway Board, New Delhi 3. Chief Secretary-cum- Commissioner, R.P.F., Eastern Railway, Kolkata 4. Divisional Security Commissioner, R.P.F., Eastern Railway, Asansole 5. Senior Security Commissioner, R.P.F., Eastern Railway, Burdwan ---------------------------- Respondents. ----------- 02 08-03-2011 Heard Sri Ashok Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Hemendra Prasad Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of all the Respondents/ R.P.F. The present writ petition has been filed with a prayer to direct the Respondents to pay family pension from the date of death of her husband with all other retirement dues including pension of her late husband with interest @ 12 % from the date of retirement till the date of the death of her husband. The petitioner’s husband was employed in the R.P.F. While he was posted as Constable in R.P.F. at Asansole , a Departmental Proceeding was initiated against him for his long absence and finally by order dated 3.2.1992, he was removed from the service. Against the order of removal, the husband of the petitioner filed an appeal, which too stood rejected on 23.11.1992. Subsequently, the husband of the petitioner died on 24.2.2006. After the death of her husband, the present writ petition was filed by the petitioner for 2 family pension and payment of other retiral dues. In this case, a counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of all the Respondents and stand has been taken that since the husband of the petitioner was removed from the service, he was not entitled to get any retiral dues, save and except payment of amount of Provident Fund, which has already been paid to the petitioner. This fact has been stated in paragraph-19 of the counter affidavit. It was stated by Sri Hemendra Prasad Singh, learned counsel for the Respondent/ R.P.F. that the amount of Provident Fund was already received on 21.1.2007 by the petitioner. Sri Singh, learned counsel for the Respondents/ R.P.F. further submits that since the husband of the petitioner was removed from the service in a Departmental Proceeding, his past services stand forfeited as par para 2433 of Railway Establishment Code read with Rule 40 of Railway Service Pension Rules 1993. In view of the facts and circumstances, the Court is of the opinion that no relief can be granted to the petitioner. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed. NKS/- ( Rakesh Kumar,J.)