Urmila Katlam v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No. 2097 of 2016 Urmila Katlam W/o. Late Shri Sohan Lal Katlam, Aged About 50 Years R/o. Near Patal Bhairavi Temple, Tahsil And District Rajnandgaon (Chhattisgarh) ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Pension And Accounts Treasury Department, Mahanadi Bhavan, Raipur District Raipur (Chhattisgarh)

2. State Bank Of India, Through Branch Manager, Central Pension Process Centre, Behind Working Hostel, Govindpura, B H E L, Bhopal, Tahsil And District Bhopal (Madhya Pradesh)

3. Superintendent Of Police, Rajnandgaon District Rajnandgaon (Chhattisgarh)

4. District Treasury Officer, Collectorate Building, Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon (Chhattisgarh) -----Respondents For Petitioner : Shri Anup Majumdar, Advocate.

For Respondents No. 1, 3 & 4/State : Shri Adhiraj Surana, Dy. Govt. Advocate.

For Respondent No.2/State Bank : Shri P.R. Patankar, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order On Board 09.06.2016

1. The limited prayer in the instant Petition is for direction to the Respondent for issuing appropriate order for revision of extraordinary pension which the Petitioner is requesting on account of death of the Petitioner's husband in a Naxal attack way back in the year 2005.

2. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that principally the State Government accepted the grant of extraordinary pension to the Petitioner as is

clear from the communication dated 29.09.2014, Annexure P/5 from Treasury Officer, Rajnandgaon to Respondent No.2, the Branch Manager, State Bank of India. However, Respondent No.2 vide letter dated 19.05.2015 has asked the State Government for issuance of specific revised extraordinary Pension Payment Order (P.P.O.) in respect of revised extraordinary pension payable to the Petitioner. According to the State Bank of India general pension is payable to the general pensioners but this is a case where under extraordinary circumstances the Petitioner has been awarded extraordinary pension.

3. The aforesaid facts submitted by the Counsel for the Petitioner and the document in support of the same are not disputed by the learned Counsel for the State Government as well as the State Bank of India.

4. In view of the aforesaid facts, in the opinion of this Court ends of the justice would be served if the present Writ Petition is disposed of at the admission stage with a direction to the State Government for issuance of specific revised extraordinary P.P.O. to the State Bank of India immediately, so that the revised extraordinary pension can be given to the Petitioner w.e.f. 01.01.2006. Considering the fact that the extraordinary pension is to be made effective for almost 10 years period now it is expected that the State Government would without fail try to issue a revised extraordinary P.P.O. to the State Bank of India for appropriate action at the Bank's end, within a period of 8 weeks from today.

5. With the aforesaid directions, the present Writ Petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) V. JUDGE kishore