Civil Writ Petition No.13727 of 2010 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.13727 of 2010 DATE OF DECISION: JULY 5, 2011 R.K. Tomar .....Petitioner VERSUS State of Haryana & others ....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH PRESENT: Mr. K.L. Dhingra, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Harish Rathee, Senior DAG, Haryana for the State. **** RANJIT SINGH, J. The petitioner, who himself is working as Principal, has approached this Court for grant of family pension on account of death of his wife, who was working as a Social Studies Mistress on temporary basis. The late wife of the petitioner had served as a teacher from 3.2.1994 to 21.5.2003 for a period of 9 years 2 months and 19 days. The petitioner, accordingly, claims that he would be entitled to the family pension on account of death of his wife. The claim of the petitioner has been declined on the ground that his late wife was a temporary employee and had no regular service. The petitioner has, accordingly, approached this Court. Civil Writ Petition No.13727 of 2010 -2- Prior to filing of the present petition, the petitioner had earlier filed a writ petition before this Court, praying for regularization, which matter was referred to the Full Bench. The writ petition filed by the petitioner, however, was withdrawn from Full Bench with liberty to first seek regularization of his late wife and then ask for family pension. The petitioner has, accordingly, filed the present petition seeking regularization. In view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Karnatka & others Vs. Uma Devi & others, 2006 (2) LLJ, 722 (sc), it would not be possible to issue any direction for regularization of service of the late wife of the petitioner. In that view of the matter, late wife of the petitioner did not have any regular service, which would entitle the petitioner to claim family pension. The petitioner is serving as a Principal and has sufficient means of livelihood. The law being what it is, no case for interference for grant of family pension is made out. The petitioner, however, may make a representation for grant of ` 25,000/- in terms of the policy, if it is due to the petitioner, on account of death of his late wife. The writ petition, however, is dismissed. July 05, 2011 (RANJIT SINGH) monika JUDGE