IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 10TH DECEMBER 2009 / 19TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 WP(C).No. 14072 of 2009(D) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------ P.L. ANNAKUTTY, D/O. LAWRANCE, PARIATHUSSERY HOUSE, KANNAMALY P.O., KOCH -08. BY ADV. SRI.K.L.JOSEPH SMT.P.SAREENA GEORGE RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- 1. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, EDUCATION, DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. ASST. EDUCTIONAL OFFICER, EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, MATTANCHERRY. 3. INDIAN AUDIT AND ACCOUNTS, DEPARTMENT OFFICE OF THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A & E), KERALA, M.G. ROAD, P.B. NO. 560, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, -39. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.NANDAKUMAR FOR R1 TO 3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.14072/09 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1: A TRUE COPY OF THE PENSION PAYMENT ORDER OF P.L.XAIVER DATED NIL. EXT.P2: A TRUE COPY OF PROCEEDINGS OF the TAHASILDAR, KOCHI BEARING NO.K DIS/1819/08/H2 DT 25.8.2008. EXT.P3: A TRUE COPY OF DEATH CERTIFICATE OF P.L.XAVIER DT 2.11.2007 ISSUED FROM THE CORPORATION OF KOCHI. EXT.P4: A TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.F/2167/2008/L DIS. DATED 27.9.2008 ISSUED BY THE ASST.EDUCATIONAL OFFICER. EXT.P5: A TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO.P2/PMH/827/K ADL./84-85/360 DT 13.1.2009 ADDRESSED TO THE ASST.EDUCATIONAL OFFICER. EXT.P6: A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.PR/8/REV/248/R/96-97/426 DT 15.11.96 ISSUED BY THE OFFICE OF THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A&E) THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Rp ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 14072 OF 2009 (D) ===================== Dated this the 10th day of December, 2009 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is an unmarried sister of Late Sri.P.L.Xavier, who retired as a full time menial on 31/7/1984 from CARE, Central Depot, Kallu Godown, Karuvelipady of the Education Department. Ext.P1 is the pension payment order. Sri.Xavier expired on 23/9/07 and Ext.P3 is the death certificate. According to the petitioner, she being a unmarried sister of Sri.Xavier, was dependent entirely upon him. On the death of Sri.Xavier, petitioner applied for family pension. That appears to have been sanctioned by Ext.P4 order passed by the AEO. However, the Accountant General issued Ext.P5 stating that as per the existing rules, sister of a pensioner is not eligible for family pension and on that basis, the application was rejected. It is challenging Ext.P5 the writ petition is filed. 2. The contention raised by the counsel for the petitioner is that though under Rule 90 of Part III KSR, an unmarried sister like her, is not eligible for family pension, an unmarried sister is eligible for family pension as provided in Rule 80 of Part III KSR. It WPC 14072/09 :2 : is on this basis the correctness of Ext.P5 order passed by the Accountant General is called in question by the petitioner. Counsel also placed reliance on the judgment of this Court in Ouseph v. State of Kerala and Others (1982 KLT 164) to contend that an unmarried sister is eligible for family pension under Rule 80 of the Rules relied on. 3. However, the note introduced to Rule 90 of Part III KSR providing for contributory family pension by GO(P) No.21/85/Fin dated 18th of January, 1985, provides that all employees of the State Government who were in service on or after 30th of September, 1977 or who retired from service on or after that date, shall be entitled to the benefit of Liberalised Family Pension. Therefore, Rule 80 cannot have any application atleast in so far as the employees who were in service or retired after 30th of September, 1977 are concerned. 4. In this case, admittedly the retirement of Sri.Xavier was on 31/7/1984. If so, any claim for family pension by his dependents can only be under Rule 90 providing for Liberalised Family Pension. None has a case that under Rule 90, an unmarried sister is eligible for family pension. In fact, the WPC 14072/09 :3 : judgment in Krishnanunni v. State of Kerala (2006(3) KLT S.N. Page No.88) upheld the exclusion of unmarried sister from the purview of Rule 90. 5. In so far as the judgment relied on by the learned counsel for the petitioner is concerned, evidently that was rendered prior to 18th of January, 1985 when the note referred to above was inserted in Rule 90 of Part III KSR. Resultantly the only conclusion that is possible is that the scheme that is governing Government servants subsequent to 30th of September, 1977 is the Liberalised Family Pension as provided in Rule 90 of Part III KSR and that in terms thereof, petitioner being the unmarried sister of the deceased is ineligible for family pension. Consequently the reasoning in Ext.P5 order passed by the Accountant General deserves to be upheld and I do so. Writ petition fails and is dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp