Smt. Krishna Devi Vs. the State of Punjab and ors. - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/610688
SubjectService
CourtPunjab and Haryana High Court
Decided OnJan-29-2003
Case NumberCivil Revision No. 5627 of 1987
Judge S.S. Nijjar, J.
Reported in(2003)133PLR533
AppellantSmt. Krishna Devi
RespondentThe State of Punjab and ors.
Appellant Advocate Ashok Gupta, Adv.
Respondent Advocate H.S. Sran, Addl. A.G.
DispositionPetition allowed
Excerpt:
- sections 100-a [as inserted by act 22 of 2002], 110 & 104 & letters patent, 1865, clause 10: [dr. b.s. chauhan, cj, l. mohapatra & a.s. naidu, jj] letters patent appeal order of single judge of high court passed while deciding matters filed under order 43, rule1 of c.p.c., - held, after introduction of section 110a in the c.p.c., by 2002 amendment act, no letters patent appeal is maintainable against judgment/order/decree passed by a single judge of a high court. a right of appeal, even though a vested one, can be taken away by law. it is pertinent to note that section 100-a introduced by 2002 amendment of the code starts with a non obstante clause. the purpose of such clause is to give the enacting part of an overriding effect in the case of a conflict with laws mentioned with the.....s.s. nijjar, j. 1. i have heard the leaned counsel for the parties at length and perused the record of the case.2. the husband of the petitioner was employed with the state of punjab from 23.5.1958 to 5.6.1984 on which date he unfortunately expired. the widow-petitioner made necessary application for the grant of g.p.f., deposit linked insurance, death-cum-retirement gratuity, house rent allowance and pensionary benefits to her as her two major sons had already relinquished their claim in favour of the widowed mother.3. it is submitted by mr. gupta that during the pendency of the petition, according to the written statement balance amount of gpf amounting to rs. 14945/- has been paid to the widow-petitioner. in the written statement it is further stated that the other retiral benefits are.....
Judgment:

S.S. Nijjar, J.

1. I have heard the leaned counsel for the parties at length and perused the record of the case.

2. The husband of the petitioner was employed with the State of Punjab from 23.5.1958 to 5.6.1984 on which date he unfortunately expired. The widow-petitioner made necessary application for the grant of G.P.F., Deposit Linked Insurance, Death-cum-Retirement Gratuity, House Rent allowance and pensionary benefits to her as her two major sons had already relinquished their claim in favour of the widowed mother.

3. It is submitted by Mr. Gupta that during the pendency of the petition, according to the written statement balance amount of GPF amounting to Rs. 14945/- has been paid to the widow-petitioner. In the written statement it is further stated that the other retiral benefits are held up for 'No Demand Certificate' due to shortage of material against him. The cost of material is to be adjusted from his death-cum-retirement gratuity and Deposit Linked Insurance amount. But for the plea that certain amounts were to be recovered from the deceased, the respondents have not denied the admissibility of the retiral benefits.

4. I am of the considered opinion that the husband of the petitioner having died during service, it would not be open to the respondents to now initiate any proceedings for recovery. It is settled proposition of law that any order which would have the effect of causing civil consequences, can only be passed after observing rules of natural justice. Therefore, of necessity, an opportunity of hearing would have to be given to the person against whom to order is sought to be passed. Since the deceased employee is no longer available, it would not be possible for the petitioner to put up a defence in any proceeding that may be initiated against the deceased-husband for recovery.

5. Consequently, I am of the considered opinion that present petition has to be al-lowed and necessary directions have to be issued to the respondents to pay the entire re-tiral benefits to the petitioner without resorting to any recovery proceedings.

6. In view of the above, the present petition is allowed. The respondents arc directedto pay entire retiral benefits to the petitioner within a period of three months from todaywith interest at the rate of 7% p.a, Needless to say, the interest on GPF amount shall beadmissible only upto 29.1.1988. No costs.