Smt. Phul Sundar Devi vs State of Bihar and Others

Chandramauli Kr. Prasad, J.—In this writ application prayer of the petitioner is to quash the communication dated 12.5.2004 (Annexure-4), whereby the claim made by the petitioner for payment of pension has been rejected. According to the petitioner, she happens to be the wife of one Shyam Bihari Singh. Said Shyam Bihari Singh was discharged from service by order dated 6.5.1968. Petitioner prayed for grant of invalid pension. Petitioner gave legal notice. In answer thereto the impugned communication has been made in which it has been stated that as the petitioner''s husband was discharged from service, in view of Rules 45 and 46 of the Bihar Pension Rules she shall not be entitled for pension.

Mr. Harendra Pratap Singh, appearing on behalf of the petitioner contends that as the petitioner''s husband was discharged from service, Rule 46 of the Bihar Pension Rules is not attracted.

I do not find any substance in the submission of Mr. Singh. Rule 46 of the Bihar Pension Rules clearly states that a person removed from service for misconduct shall not be entitled to pension. It is not the assertion of the petitioner that he has been discharged from service simplicitor.

There is yet another impediment in the way of the petitioner. According to her own showing her husband was discharged as back as on 6.5.1968 wherein she has chosen to agitate her claim in the year 2004. I do not find any merit in the application and it is dismissed in limine.