2025:HHC:12828 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.15455 of 2024 Date of Decision: 06.05.2025 _______________________________________________________ Sumna Devi …….Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. … Respondents _______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Abhinav Gabhroo, Advocate, vice Mr. Amrick Singh, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General, Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar & Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocate Generals, with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. ____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): While placing on record communication dated 03.05.2025, issued under the signatures of Principal, Government Senior Secondary School, Sanjauli, District Shimla, Himachal Pradesh, Mr. B.C.Verma, learned Additional Advocate General, states that an amount of Rs. 3,35,970/- pertaining to the period from 15.09.2022 to 31.12.2024, on account of family pension, has already been sanctioned in favour of the petitioner, vide order dated 03.05.2025. He further states that w.e.f 01.01.2025 petitioner is in receipt of family pension to the tune of Rs. 12,780/- per month. 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2. Precisely, the grouse of the petitioner, as came to be highlighted through instant petition is/was that though she was entitled to family pension w.e.f 01.09.2022, but same has been sanctioned to her only w.e.f 01.01.2025. In the aforesaid background, this Court passed following order dated 03.04.2025:- “Pursuant to order dated 09.01.2025, learned Additional Advocate General has placed on record communication dated 2.4.2025, issued under the signatures of Director Higher Education, Himachal Pradesh, perusal whereof reveals that family pension at the rate of Rs. 9000/- per month has been sanctioned by the Accountant General, Himachal Pradesh in favour of the petitioner i.e. wife of late Sh. Pawan Kumar. Perusal of pension statement placed on record by the respondents suggests that family pension has been sanctioned to the petitioner w.e.f. January, 2025, whereas petitioner ought to have been granted family pension w.e.f. 1st September 2022. Petitioner had become eligible for family pension after the death of her husband, who expired on 15.09.2022, as is evident from the afore communication. In view of the above, learned Additional Advocate General to have instructions or file reply on or before the next date of hearing. List on 6.5.2025.” 3. Pursuant to aforesaid order, learned Additional Advocate General has placed on record communication dated 03.05.2025, as taken note hereinabove. Since it is quite apparent from the aforesaid communication that family pension stands sanctioned w.e.f. 01.09.2022 and a sum of Rs. 3,35,970/- has already been sanctioned towards pension arrears in favour of the petitioner, coupled with the 3 fact that petitioner is in receipt of monthly pension of Rs. 12,780/- w.e.f 01.01.2025, nothing much is left to be adjudicated in the instant petition. 4. Consequently, in view of above, present petition has been rendered infructuous and is accordingly disposed of with a direction to the respondents to ensure that arrears, as detailed in afore communication, if not already paid, shall be paid expeditiously preferably within a period of two months. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. (Sandeep Sharma), Judge May 06, 2025 (Sunil)