# Km. Haseen Bi v. State of U.P. & Ors

- **Citation:** (2023) 8 ILRA 940
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2023-07-07
- **Case number:** Writ-A No. 9955 of 2023
- **Bench:** Ajit Kumar
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/km-haseen-bi-v-state-of-u-p-ors-50644
- **Pages:** 4

## Headnote

A. Service Law - Family Pension -
Entitlement of daughter after death of
widow - Requirement to produce the
succession certificate issued by District
Judge
-
Permissibility
-
GO
dated
08.08.1986 - Para 9 - GO dated 03.12.2012
- Under the GOs, the succession certificate
can be required to be furnished, only when
the the department was not able to verify
the facts regarding claim of the petitioner
that he is dependent of the deceased
employee - Non-compliance thereof - Effect
- Held, there is no such consideration
accorded in the order impugned to compel
the authority to ask the petitioner to furnish
succession certificate - High Court remitted
the matter to the authority to consider the
claim in the light of GO dated 08.08.1986
and 03.12.2012. (Para 5 and 10)
8 All. Km. Haseen Bi Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
941
Writ petition allowed. (E-1)

## Text

940 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES

17. I find that the Hon'ble Supreme
Court has categorically laid down the law
that the petitioner while approaching the
High Court under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India must disclose all the
relevant facts in his writ petition and if
petitioner does not disclose the relevant
facts and material, then he is not entitled
for any relief from the High Court in
exercise of its extraordinary jurisdiction
under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India and such writ petition is liable to be
dismissed.

18. In the present case, petitioner at
the time of filing of the writ petition was
fully aware about the filing of Writ-A
No.4262 of 2023 (Arun Kumar Mishra vs.
State of U.P. and others) and was also
aware of the order dated 11.4.2023 passed
by this Court in the aforesaid writ petition
but deliberately he has not disclosed the
said facts in the present writ petition.
Petitioner has not disclosed the aforesaid
facts in his writ petition only with an
intention to somehow obtain an order from
this court for conclusion of the inquiry and
consequential
action
pursuant
to
his
complaint. Since petitioner has concealed
material facts which have direct bearing on
the result of this writ petition, as such I am
of the view that petitioner is not entitled for
any relief from this Court in exercise of its
extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226
of the Constitution of India and the present
writ petition is liable to be dismissed.

19. I further find that when the facts
of the present writ petition are seen in the
light of the aforementioned law laid down
by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, then it
becomes crystal clear that petitioner has
concealed material facts while filing
present writ petition before this Court and
therefore, this writ petition is liable to be
dismissed.

20. In view of the aforesaid reasons
and the law laid down by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court, mentioned herein above,
present writ petition filed by the petitioner
is dismissed.
----------
(2023) 8 ILRA 940
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 07.07.2023

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE AJIT KUMAR, J.

Writ-A No. 9955 of 2023

Km. Haseen Bi ...Petitioner
Versus
State of U.P. & Ors. ...Respondents

Counsel for the Petitioner:
Sri Ikram Ahmad, Sri Asar Mukhtar

Counsel for the Respondents:
C.S.C, Sri Pankaj Srivastava

A. Service Law - Family Pension -
Entitlement of daughter after death of
widow - Requirement to produce the
succession certificate issued by District
Judge
-
Permissibility
-
GO
dated
08.08.1986 - Para 9 - GO dated 03.12.2012
- Under the GOs, the succession certificate
can be required to be furnished, only when
the the department was not able to verify
the facts regarding claim of the petitioner
that he is dependent of the deceased
employee - Non-compliance thereof - Effect
- Held, there is no such consideration
accorded in the order impugned to compel
the authority to ask the petitioner to furnish
succession certificate - High Court remitted
the matter to the authority to consider the
claim in the light of GO dated 08.08.1986
and 03.12.2012. (Para 5 and 10)
8 All. Km. Haseen Bi Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
941
Writ petition allowed. (E-1)
(Delivered by Hon'ble Ajit Kumar, J.)

1. Heard Sri Ikram Ahmad, learned
counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing
Counsel for respondent nos.1 and 2 and Sri
Pankaj Srivastava, learned counsel for the
respondent no.3.

2. The petitioner in this writ petition
as assailed the order dated 18.11.2022
whereby the petitioner has been directed to
furnish a succession certificate issued by
the District Judge in support of her claim
for family pension. The petitioner is the
daughter of Late Kalbe Ali Khan who was
a Government Employee and after his
death his wife Smt. Khateeja Begum was
receiving pension vide P.P.O. No.318152.
However, later on she died in the year 2015
and the petitioner was made to run from
pillar to post for getting family pension
cleared for her.

3. It is argued by learned counsel for
the petitioner that the petitioner is entitled
to family pension in terms of the
Government Order dated 03.12.2012 which
provides that even after attaining the age of
25 years, the dependent would be entitled
to
family
pension
that
includes
an
unmarried daughter. It is submitted that in
the light of the relevant provisions that lay
down the procedure as per the Government
Order dated 08.08.1986 for the purpose of
family pension, an applicant is required to
furnish necessary succession certificate or
an affidavit filed before the Executive
Magistrate/Tehsildar in the event the
department concerned has not been able to
verify the facts regarding claim of the
petitioner as dependent of the deceased
employee or his widow, who used to
receive
pension
and
family
pension
respectively.
4.
Relevant
Government
Order dated 3.12.2012 is reproduced
hereunder:

"उत्तर प्रदेश शासन

कवत्त (सामान्य) अनुभाग-3

सांख्या सा-3-1665/दस-2012-308-97

लखनऊ: कदनॉि 03 कदसम्बर, 2012

िायादलय ज्ञाप

कवर्य- कदनाांि 01 जनवरी 2006 िे पूवद सेवाकनवृत्त/मृत
राज्य
सरिार
िे
पेंशनरों/िमदचाररयों
िी
अकववाकहत/कविवा/तलािशुदा पुकत्रयों िो पाररवाररि पेंशन िी
पात्रता िे सम्बन्ि में।

शासनादेश सांख्या-सा-3-1508/दस-2008-308-97,
कदनाांि 08 कदसम्बर, 2008 द्वारा कदनाांि 01 जनवरी 2006
िो अथवा उसिे उपरान्त सेवा कनवृत्त/मृत सरिारी िमदचाररयों
िी पाररवाररि पेंशन िी अनुमन्यता हेतु पररवार िो कनम्न प्रिार
वगीिृत किया गया है-

वगद (I)

(ि) कविवा/कविुर, आजन्म अथवा पुनकवदवाह जो भी
पहले हो

(ख) पुत्र/पुत्री (कविवा पुत्री सकहत) िो कववाह/पुनकवदवाह
अथवा 25 वर्द िी आयु ति अथवा जीकविोपाजदन िी कतकथ,
जो भी पहले हो, ति।

वगद (II)

(ग) अकववाकहत/कविवा/तलािशुदा पुत्री, जो उपरोक्त वगद-
(I) से आच्छाकदत नहीं है िो कववाह/पुनकवदवाह ति अथवा
जीकविोपाजदन िी कतकथ अथवा मृत्यु िी कतकथ ति, जो भी
पहले हो,

(घ) ऐसे माता कपता जो सरिारी सेवि पर उसिे
जीवनिाल में पूणदतः आकश्रत रहे हों तथा मृत सरिारी सेवि ने
अपने पीछे िोई कविवा/कविुर अथवा बच्चे नहीं छोडे हैं।

आकश्रत माता-कपता, अकववाकहत/तलािशुदा/कविवा पुत्री
िो पाररवाररि पेंशन जीवन पयदन्त कमलेगी।

वगद (II) से आच्छाकदत अकववाकहत/कविवा/तलािशुदा
पुत्री तथा आकश्रत माता/कपता िो पाररवाररि पेंशन िी
अनुमन्यता उसी दशा में होगी जब मृति िे पररवार में उपयुदक्त
वगद-(I) में सकम्मकलत पात्र व्यकक्त उपलब्ि न हों तथा मृति
सरिारी सेवि िे पररवार में ऐसी िोई सांतान न हो, जो
कविलॉग हो। पाररवाररि पेंशन िी अनुमन्यता बच्चों िो उनिी
942 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
जन्मकतकथ िे क्रम में होगी अथादत् पहले जन्म कलये बच्चे िो
अनुमन्यता पहले होगी और उसिी पात्रता समाप्त होने िे
उपरान्त बाद में जन्म लेने वाले बच्चे िी पात्रता स्थाकपत होगी।

उपयुदक्त व्यवस्था कदनाांि 01 जनवरी, 2006 से प्रभावी
किये जाने िे िारण कदाांि 01 जनवरी 2006 िे पूवद सेवा
कनवृत्त/मृत सरिारी िमदचाररयों िी अकववाकहत/तलािशुदा/कविवा
पुकत्रयों िो उपयुदक्त लाभ अनुमन्य नहीं हो पा रहा है।

2- शासन िो इस आशय िे प्रत्यावेदन प्राप्त हो रहें है
कि कदनाांि 01 जनवरी 2006 िे पूवद सेवाकनवृत्त/मृत सरिारी
िमदचाररयों िी अकववाकहत/कविवा/तलािशुदा पुकत्रयों िो भी
उपयुदक्तानुसार पाररवाररि पेंशन िी सुकविा अनुमन्य िी जाय।

3- िेन्र सरिार में कदनाांि 01 जनवरी 2006 िे पूवद
अथवा उसिे पिात सेवाकनवृत्त/मृत पेंशनरों/िमदचाररयों िी
अकववाकहत/कविवा/तलािशुदा पुकत्रयों िो पाररवाररि पेंशन 25
वर्द िी आयु िे उपरान्त भी सांगत शतों िे साथ समान रूप से
अनुमन्य है, चाहे उनिा वैिव्य/तलाि 25 वर्द िी आयु िे पूवद
हुआ हो अथवा उसिे पिात।

4- उपयुदक्त िे सम्बन्ि में मुझे यह िहने िा कनदेश हुआ
है कि कदनाांि 01 जनवरी 2006 िे पूवद सेवाकनवृत्त/मृत
पेंशनरों/सरिारी िमदचाररयों िी अकववाकहत/कविवा/तलािशुदा
पुकत्रयों िो, चाहे उनिा वैिव्य/तलाि, उनिी 25 वर्द िी
आयु िे पूवद अथवा पिात् घकटत हुआ हो, दोनों ही दशाओां
में, पाररवाररि पेंशन उपयुदक्त शासनादेश सांख्या-सा-31508/दस-2008-308-97, कदनाांि 08 कदसम्बर 2008 िे
प्रस्तर 7(3). (4) एवां (5) में कवकनकददष्ट शतों िे अिीन
तत्िाल प्रभाव से अनुमन्य िराये जाने िी श्री राज्यपाल महोदय
सहर्द स्वीिृकत प्रदान िरते हैं।

5- ऐसे प्रिरण कजनमें अकववाकहत/कविवा/तलािशुदा
पुकत्रयों िो पाररवाररि पेंशन हेतु आकश्रतों िी सूची में सकम्मकलत
नहीं किया गया है, उन प्रिरणों में पेंशन प्रपत्र िे भाग-2 में
सम्बकन्ित
पेंशनरों/पाररवाररि
पेंशनरों
द्वारा
अकववाकहत/कविवा/तलािशुदा पुकत्रयों िे नाम तथा जन्म कतकथ
(यथेष्ट प्रमाण पत्र िे साथ) अांकित िर सम्बकन्ित
िायादलयाध्यक्ष/कवभागाध्यक्ष
िो
प्रस्तुत
किया
जायेगा।
िायादलयाध्यक्ष/कवभागाध्यक्ष उपरोक्त नामाांिन प्रपत्र (पेंशन प्रपत्र
िा भाग-2) िो सत्याकपत िरते हुए सम्बकन्ित पेंशन
स्वीितादकििारी िो प्रेकर्त िरेंगे। पेंशन स्वीितादकििारी उक्त
नामाांिन प्रपत्र िे आिार पर पाररवाररि पेंशनरों िी पात्रता
सूची में अकववाकहत/कविवा/तलािशुदा पुकत्रयों िे नाम एवां
जन्मकतकथ अांकित किये जाने सम्बन्िी आदेश सम्बकन्ित
िोर्ाकििारी
एवां
प्रकतकलकप
सम्बकन्ित
िायादलयाध्यक्ष/कवभागाध्यक्ष तथा पेंशनर/पाररवाररि पेंशनर िो
प्रेकर्त िरेंगे।

आनन्त कमश्र

प्रमुख सकचव, कवत्त।"

(emphasis added)

5. Learned Standing Counsel though
has tried to defend the order for the reason
assigned therein but could not meet the
argument which finds support in paragraph
9
of
the
Government
Order
dated
08.08.1986
that
there
is
no
such
consideration
accorded
in
the
order
impugned to compel the authority to ask
the
petitioner
to
furnish
succession
certificate. Paragraph 9 of the Government
Order is reproduced hereunder:

9- प्राथदना पत्र प्राप्त होने िे उपरान्त आवेदि िो
सम्बकन्ित िायादलयाध्यक्ष/कवभागाध्यक्ष िो इस बात से सन्तुष्ट
िरना होगा कि वह सम्बकन्ित सरिारी सेवि िी कविवा/कविुर
अथवा पात्र सांतान है। सम्बकन्ित िायादलयध्यक्ष/कवभागाध्यक्ष
उपरोक्त िी पुकष्ट प्रथमतः अपने िायादलय में उपलब्ि अकभलेखों
अथवा आवेदि द्वारा प्रस्तुत सांगत दस्तावेजों िे आिार
िरगें/यकद आवेदि अपनी पहचान हेतु िोई दस्तावेज प्रस्तुत न
िर सिें और इस िायादलय में भी इस हेतु िोई अकभलेख
उपलब्ि न हो तो सम्बकन्ित िायादलयाध्यक्ष/कवभागाध्यक्ष अपने
िायादलय िे किन्हीं दो वररष्ठ तथा स्थायी िमदचाररयों से
आवेदि िी कशनाख्त िरवा ले। यकद उपयुदक्तानुसार भी
िायादवाही किया जाना सम्भव न हो सिे तो सम्बकन्ित आदेवि
िो कनम्न में से एि साक्ष्य प्रस्तुत िरना होगा-

1- न्यायालय द्वारा प्रस्तुत उत्तराकििार प्रमाण-पत्र या

2- िायदिारी मकजस्ट्रेट अथवा तहसीलदार िे समक्ष
कदया गया शपथ पत्र।"

(Emphasis added)

6. Learned Standing Counsel at this
stage submits that the matter may be
remitted to the authority concerned to pass
order afresh in the light of the relevant
8 All. Balram Gupta Vs. State of U.P. & Anr.
943
rules and Government Order issued from
time to time.

7. Learned counsel for the respondent
no.3 submits that it is for the authority
concerned to pass appropriate order.

8. Having heard learned counsel for
the parties and their arguments raised
across the bar, I find that the order dated
18.11.2022 impugned here in this petition
is quite an unreasonable order so as to
justify
the
directions
issued
therein
inasmuch as there is no consideration
accorded to the procedure laid down in
paragraph
no.9
of
the
aforesaid
Government Order.

9. In the circumstances, therefore, the
order dated 18.11.2022 cannot be sustained
in law and is hereby, accordingly, quashed.

10. The matter is remitted to the
authority concerned to look into and
consider the claim of the petitioner in light
of the relevant provisions as contained
under
the
Government
Order
dated
03.12.2012 and as per the procedure
prescribed vide paragraph 9 of the
Government Order dated 08.08.1986 to
determine the claim for family pension.

11. The order shall be passed within a
period of thirty days from the date of
production of certified copy of this order.

12. Accordingly, the writ petition
succeeds and is, allowed as above.
----------
(2023) 8 ILRA 943
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 12.07.2023

BEFORE
THE HON'BLE AJIT KUMAR, J.

Writ-A No. 10448 of 2023

Balram Gupta ...Petitioner
Versus
State of U.P. & Anr. ...Respondents

Counsel for the Petitioner:
Sri Dharmendra Kumar Srivastava

Counsel for the Respondents:
C.S.C.

Service Law - U.P. Revenue Code,2006 -
Section 225 - Preliminary Fact-Finding Inquiry
- Tehsildar facing internal departmental scrutiny
based on complaint by Bar Association - No
regular departmental proceedings initiated -
Challenge to preliminary report on grounds of
statutory bar under Section 225, U.P. Revenue
Code, 2006 - Maintainability - Held:
Where only a preliminary fact-finding inquiry
has
been
conducted
by
the
Revenue
Department based on complaints, and no
formal disciplinary proceedings or chargesheet has been initiated, judicial review
under Article 226 of the Constitution is
premature. Section 225 of the U.P. Revenue
Code,
2006
provides
protection
to
government officials acting in good faith in
the discharge of official duties, but such
statutory protection is relevant only after
initiation of formal proceedings. The Court
declined to interfere at this stage, holding
that an internal departmental communication
or preliminary report is not amenable to
judicial review unless it forms the basis of a
regular enquiry impacting civil rights. The
petition was dismissed, leaving it open to the
petitioner to challenge any future disciplinary
action if initiated.

Petition dismissed.

Case Law Citations:

1. Zunjarrao Bhikaji Nagarkar Vs U.O.I. & ors.,
(1999) 7 SCC 409

2. Ramesh Chandra Singh Vs High Court of
Allahabad & anr., (2007) 4 SCC 247