2025:UHC:1415 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPSS No. 244 of 2025 Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Tapan Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. Mr. Pradeep Hairiya, learned Standing Counsel for the State/respondent nos. 1 to 3. 3. Mr. Siddhartha Sah, learned counsel for respondent no. 4. 4. By the instant petition the petitioner is praying for the following reliefs: “i. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding/directing the respondent nos. 3 & 4 to correct the name of the petitioner as Smt. Savitri Devi in the pension application form/pension record. ii. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding/directing the respondents to issue family pension to the petitioner and further be pleased to direct the respondents to give the arrears of the pension along with 18% annual interest till the date of its realization. ” 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner’s husband, who was serving as Peon died on 26.04.2024. He submits that in the service record of the petitioner’s husband the petitioner’s name being a nominee and wife of the deceased employee is correctly shown as Smt. Savitri Devi; however, subsequently, due to a clerical mistake of the office concerned in the documents, which was submitted for grant of family pension, the name is incorrectly mentioned as Sumitra Devi. 6. He submits that not only in the service record of the deceased employee but in other documents like family register, Aadhar card, Pan Card the name is shown as Savitri Devi. 7. Learned counsel for the respondent have not disputed this fact that in the service record and other documents the name of the petitioner is shown as Smt. Savitri Devi; however, due to some inadvertence and clerical mistake the name has 2025:UHC:1415 been shown as Sumitra Devi. 8. Since, this appears to be a clerical mistake and if it is a clerical mistake it has to be rectified without any delay. 9. Mr. Siddhartha Sah, learned counsel for respondent no. 4, have not disputed this fact that in the service record of the deceased employee the petitioner’s name has rightly shown as Savitri Devi as nominee of the deceased. 10. Since, it appears to be a clerical mistake and it has to be rectified; therefore, the respondent no. 4 is directed to sent the necessary documents and recommendation for rectification of the name of the petitioner positively within a week and thereafter within two weeks the respondent nos. 1 to 3 will rectify it in all the documents including the pension papers and grant the family pension without any delay. 11. It is made clear that this entire exercise shall be completed positively within three weeks. 12. Subject to the direction as made above, the writ petition is disposed of finally. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 28.02.2025 PR 2025:UHC:1415 2025:UHC:1415