IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT WRIT PETITION NO.51858 OF 2019 (S-RES) BETWEEN:
1 . SMT. THAHASEENA, W/O LATE SAFEERUR RAHIMAN, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, RESIDING AT 24, BHOOPASANDRA, R.M.V. EXTENSION 2ND STAGE, BENGALURU – 560 094.
2 . SMT. ASMA, W/O LATE SAFFEERUR RAHIMAN, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, RESIDING AT UMMAR KHAYAM ROAD, TILAK NAGAR, MYSURU – 570 015.
3 . SMT. NAJEEBA SULTANA, D/O LATE SAFFEERUR RAHIMAN, AGEDA BOUT 30 YEARS, RESIDING AT 4/5, 16TH CROSS, SHANTHINAGAR, MYSURU - 570 019.
4 . SRI. MOHAMMED SALEEM, S/O LATE SAFFEERUR RAHIMAN, AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.3, 4TH CROSS, ANDANAPPA BLOCK, MATTADAHALLI, R.T.NAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 032.
5 . MISS. AYESHA, D/O LATE SAFFEERUR RAHIMAN, AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.3, 4TH CROSS, ANDANAPPA BLOCK, MATTADAHALLI, R.T.NAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 032.
... PETITIONERS (BY SRI. PRASHANTH P.N., ADVOCATE) AND:
THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE O/O INTERNAL SECURITY DIVISION, #60, RICHMOND ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 025.
(BY SRI. M.V.RAMESH JOIS, AGA) ... RESPONDENT THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENDORSEMENT DTD.5.8.2019 ISSUED BY THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE O/O INTERNAL SECURITY DIVISION THE RESPONDENT HEREIN VIDE ANNEXURE-P BEING ARBITRARY, CAPRICOUS, AND FOR BEING NOT IN CONSONANCE WITH LETTER AND SPIRIT OF LAW OF LAND; AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER The short grievance of the petitioners is against the withholding of terminal benefits of the deceased-employee namely Mr.Saffeerur Rahiman who allegedly died in harness on 01.02.2019.
2. Sri. M.V.Ramesh Jois, learned AGA having accepted notice for the respondent submits that the impugned Endorsement dated 05.08.2018, a copy whereof is at Annexure-P has been issued by the official respondents inasmuch as there was rival claim for the terminal benefits by and between the petitioners inter se and the authorities are not competent to decide the same.
3. The contention of the learned AGA that the terminal benefits shall be payable to the nominee i.e., first respondent who shall hold them in trust for all those who are legally entitled to succeed to the estate of the deceased- employee in accordance with the personal law applicable to them, has force.
4. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the petition papers, this Court opines that the relief needs to be granted to the petitioners inasmuch as, the first petitioner Smt. Thahaseena the undisputed widow of the deceased employee happens to be the nominee in the Service Register at Annexure-A; rest of the petitioners, their counsel submits, are agreeable for the terminal benefits being granted to the first petitioner as stated in their affidavit dated 12.06.2019, a copy whereof is at Annexure-N.
In the above circumstances, this writ petition succeeds; a Writ of Mandamus issues to the respondent to release the terminal benefits of deceased Mr. Saffeerur Rahiman in favour of the first petitioner subject to all other petitioners furnishing an indemnity bond or such other documents as may be required by the respondents in accordance with law.
If delay is brooked in releasing the terminal benefits within the prescribed period, despite the petitioners doing the needful, the respondent shall pay to the first petitioner a sum of Rs.5,000/- per month with liberty to recovering the same from the erring officials concerned.
Time for compliance is three months from the date the required documents are furnished by the petitioners.
No costs, as of now.
Sd/- JUDGE DS