A case regarding whether the child adopted after the death of a government employee is entitled to a pension was decided on 17 January 2023 by the two-judge bench, Justice V. Ramasubramanian, and Justice B.V. Nagarathna. The Appellant (Shri Ram Shridhar Chimurkar) was represented by the learned counsel, Mrs. K. Sarada Devi, and the respondent (Union of India) by the Additional Solicitor General of India, Mrs. Madhvi Goradia Divan.
Facts
Shridhar Chimurkar was superintendent in the office of Deputy Director and HO National Survey Organisation. In 1993, he retired after attaining superannuation; in 1994 he died issueless, leaving only his wife Maya Motghare. In 1996, two years after the death of Shridhar Chimurkar, his wife adopted Sri Ram Shridhar Chimurkar. In 1998, Maya married Chandra Prakash and resided with him in Janakpuri, New Delhi so the appellant, Shri Ram Shridhar Chimurkar claimed a family pension and with this regard, he wrote a letter to respondents dated 18 January 2000. The decision of the letter written by the appellant was given on 23 February 2000 and the claim for family pension was rejected on the ground that children adopted by the widow after the death of the government officials could not be entitled to receive a pension as per Rule 54 (14)(b) of the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules [CCS Pension Rules]
Aggrieved by the decision of the respondents(UOI) the appellant took the matter to Central Administrative Tribunal, Mumbai and filed original application praying that the order of UOI is quashed and set aside. The tribunal gave a decision in favour of the appellant by giving the following reason
Initially, Rule 54(14)(b) of CCS (Pension) Rules excluded sons or daughters born or
adopted by the government servant after retirement from the benefit of family
pension. But the amendment to the above rule in 1990 and 1993 removed the bar
against children born or adopted after retirement.
The order dated 23 February 2000 by the respondents, Union of India was set-aside.
By way of appeal, the case went to the Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court. The respondents (UOI) filed a writ petition and the High Court allowed the same. The court reversed the order and judgment passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal. The High Court passed an order in favor of the respondents (UOI).
Issues
- Whether a child adopted by the widow of a government servant would be included within the scope of the definition of ‘family’ under Rule 54(14)(b) of CCS (Pension) Rules.
- Adopted child be entitled to receive a family pension under the said rule.
Legal Question
- Rule 54(14)(b) of CCS (Pension) Rule, 1972
The question is to interpret the phrase “in relation to a government servant” and the court interpreted it by observing that a family member must have a close connection to the dead government employee. Therefore, the phrase does not include a son or daughter adopted after the death of government employee.
- Sections 8 & 12 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act,1956
The Court held that the above provisions of HAMA,1956 determine the rights of a son adopted by Hindu widow only against his adoptive family and he cannot be deemed to have the same rights and entitlements against the government.
Conclusion
After getting a decision in favor of the respondents (UOI), the appellant filed an appeal in the Supreme Court. The apex court ruled that a son or daughter adopted by the widow after the death of a government employee would not be included under the term “family” under the Central Civil Services (pension) Rules, 1972.
The appeal was dismissed
Written By Geasu Sharma, Amity University, Noida, IVth semester
0 Comments