SHANNO BEGUM AND 3 OTHERS v. STATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
WRIA/1543/2025 · 2025-02-07
Prakash Padia
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 15172 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 15172 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:17957 Court No. - 7 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 1543 of 2025 Petitioner :- Shanno Begum And 3 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Tanuj Shahi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Shashi Kant Srivastava Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J.
1. The petitioners have preferred the present writ petition with the following prayers:- (i) Issue, a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no.2 to include the name of petitioner no.1 as Nominee of the petitioner no.2 for receiving the family pension. (ii) Issue, a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent No.2 to decide the representations dated 01.08.2024/18.01.2025 in terms of Rule 54 of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972, and G.O. No. 1/13/09 dated 11.09.2013.
2. It is argued by the learned counsel for the petitioners that late Nawab Hussain, the deceased father of the petitioners, served as a teacher in Primary School Takia Deenapur under the Basic Education Department. He worked for 35 years, 9 month and 16 days and superannuated on 30.06.1998. It is further argued that upon his death, the petitioner no.2, the widow of late Nawab Hussain, became the sole beneficiary of the pension under PPO No. 585/02/1998. It is also argued that petitioner no.1 is the widowed daughter of late Nawab Hussain, lost her husband on 23.06.2003 and is currently residing with petitioner no.2. She is illiterate, unemployed, and without any means of independent income, as such petitioner no.1-Shanno Begum is entitled for the benefit of his father late Nawab Hussain. It is further argued that petitioners have made representations dated 01.08.2024 and 18.01.2025 in regard to made nominee of the petitioner no.2 for receiving pension, but till date no decision has been taken by the authority concerned.
3. On the other hand, Sri S.K. Srivastava, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent no.2 submits that respondent no.2-Basic Shiksha Adhikari (B.S.A.), Pilibhit, Uttar Pradesh will take appropriate decision in the matter, expeditiously.
4. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the present petition is
disposed of directing the petitioners to file fresh representation along with earlier representation ventilating all their grievances before the authority concerned within a period of two weeks from today. If such a representation has been filed within the stipulated period, the respondent no.2- Basic Shiksha Adhikari (B.S.A.), Pilibhit, Uttar Pradesh will pass appropriate orders on the aforesaid representation most expeditiously and preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this order without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties, if there is no legal impediment.
Order Date :- 7.2.2025 T.S. Digitally signed by :- TRIBHUWAN SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- TRIBHUWAN SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad