[2025:RJ-JP:51880] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2914/2025 Rachna Sharma D/o Late Shri Dwarka Prasad Sharma, Aged About 52 Years, R/o F-100 Mohan Nagar, Hindaun, Karauli, Being Mentally Challenged Is Represented By Shri Rajendra Prasad Sharma S/o Late Shri Dwarka Prasad Sharma, Aged About 59 Years, R/o Dhabai Ke Haveli Ke Peeche, Chatikna Pada, Karauli, Rajasthan- 322241 (Brother) ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary Ayurved Department, Jaipur, Rajasthan. 2. The Joint Director, Pension And Pensioners Welfare Department, Regional Office, Bharatpur, Rajasthan. 3. The Director, Directorate Of Pension And Pensioners Welfare, Jyoti Nagar, Lalkothi, Jaipur, Rajasthan- 302015 4. The Director, Ayurved Department, Sawai Madhopur, Rajasthan. 5. The Deputy Diretor, Ayurved Department, Karoli, Rajasthan. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Aditya Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Parth Sharma for Mr. Bhuvnesh Sharma, AAG Mr. Shubham Gupta for Mr. Rahul Lodha, Dy. G.C. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order 20/11/2025 1. Instant writ petition is filed with following prayer:- 1. The action-omission on the part of the respondents in not taking any decision over the application submitted by the petitioner and [2025:RJ-JP:51880] (2 of 4) [CW-2914/2025] rather subjecting her to undue harassment because of miscommunication between themselves, may kindly be declared as arbitrary and illegal. 2. The respondents may kindly be directed to grant the benefit of family pension to the petitioner with effect from 27.06.2022 i.e. the date of death of father of petitioner. 3. Costs of the writ petition may also be awarded to the petitioner for the undue harassment and mental agony suffered by her because of the lackadaisical conduct of the state respondents. 2. The case of present petitioner is that father of present petitioner has superannuated from the post of Ayurved Chikitsak under the Ayurved Department, Hindaun City, on 31.01.1991 and after his superannuation, he was receiving pensionary benefits from the respondent-Department. After death of father of present petitioner on 27.06.2022, the petitioner has submitted a representation for grant of family pension. When the family pension was not granted, then petitioner approached this Court by filing a S.B. CWP No.17403/2024 and vide order dated 18.11.2024, the petitioner was given a liberty to submit a representation. But this representation was dismissed on 11.12.2024 without verification of facts as submitted by the petitioner. 3. The material placed on record clearly indicate that the service record of late Sh. Dwarka Prasad Sharma (pensioner) was not found and in absence of service record, the entitlement of grant of pension, was not decided by the respondent-Department. [2025:RJ-JP:51880] (3 of 4) [CW-2914/2025] 4. We have given thoughtful consideration to the issue and considered submission of learned counsel appearing on behalf of Ayurved Department. 5. Herein this case, the PPO was already issued to Dwarka Prasad Sharma after his superannuation on 31.01.1991 and a copy of PPO is already placed on record. The petitioner is a daughter of deceased pensioner (Government servant) and she is mentally challenged person by birth. The Annexure-3 submitted with present petition clearly indicate that mother of present petitioner (wife of deceased pensioner) was also a Government servant and she expired on 19.03.2016. The family details submitted by deceased pensioner (Annexure-3) indicate name of present petitioner as family member and also mentally retarded and unmarried daughter. It is also an admitted fact that without verification, present petitioner was denied family pension by the respondents. 6. Have taken note of submission, it is appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with following directions:- (i) The respondent Nos. 4 and 5 shall examine and recommend the case of present petitioner for grant of family pension within 45 days from date of receipt of copy of this order. (ii) As soon as, the case is received, respondent Nos. 2 and 3 shall consider the recommendation and pass an order of grant pension, if petitioner is found eligible as per rules within a period of 45 days from date of receipt of recommendation. 7. The entire exercise has to be completed as early as possible but within four months. [2025:RJ-JP:51880] (4 of 4) [CW-2914/2025] 8. With aforesaid, the writ petition with pending application, if any, stands disposed of. (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J GAURAV /213