Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, originally Sumanbai Kurdukar (since deceased, represented by legal heir Raghvendra Joshi), filed a writ petition seeking directions to the respondents to fix her pay by taking into consideration her application dated 31st March 1989 regarding her option to continue her existing scale for the purpose of pension. The dispute centered on whether the option was given on the cut-off date of 31st March 1989 as claimed by the petitioner, or in 1993 as contended by the Zilla Parishad and the State Government. The court noted that this involved a disputed question of fact which cannot be adjudicated in writ jurisdiction. Additionally, the court observed that pensionary benefits are only payable to the employee and legal heirs do not get any right to the pension. Consequently, the court dismissed the writ petition, discharged the rule, and made no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Writ Jurisdiction - Disputed Questions of Fact - The court declined to entertain a writ petition involving disputed questions of fact regarding the date of submission of an option form, as such issues cannot be adjudicated in extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. (Para 3) B) Service Law - Pension - Right of Legal Heirs - Pensionary benefits are only payable to the employee and legal heirs do not get any right to the pension. The court held that even if the option was valid, the legal heir cannot claim pensionary benefits. (Para 4)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioner's option to continue existing scale for pension purposes was given within the cut-off date of 31st March 1989, and whether the legal heir is entitled to pensionary benefits.
Final Decision
Writ Petition dismissed. Rule discharged. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Disputed questions of fact cannot be adjudicated in writ jurisdiction
- Pensionary benefits are only payable to the employee and legal heirs do not get any right to pension
