9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (8) TMI 891X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e 1st Respondent. On 4th August, 1967 he was placed under suspension. He ultimately died on 25th July, 1990. It is admitted that the services of the Appellant's husband were not terminated and he was kept under suspension for the entire period between 4th August, 1967 and 25th July, 1990. The Appellant's husband was not paid any amounts including subsistence allowance during this period. After the death of her husband, the Appellant claimed payments of all amounts due and payable to her husband during employment. As no payment was made she filed C.W.J.C. No. 9517 of 1998 in the Patna High Court. During the pendency of the Writ Petition the Registrar, Co-operative Society granted family pension. The High Court by, an Order dated 3 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... certificate that he is not engaged in any other employment, business, profession or vocation. Mr. B.B. Singh submits that such a certificate was never submitted. He submits that for this reason the Appellant's husband was not entitled to subsistence allowance. Mr. B.B. Singh also submits that the Appellant's husband only reported at the Headquarter assigned to him on 3rd June, 1968 and did not report at the Headquarter on any other day during the period 4th August, 1967 to 25th July, 1990. Mr. B.B. Singh submitted that as he was not reporting at the Headquarter, he was not entitled to subsistence allowance. 7. Mr. B.B. Singh relied upon the authority of the Patna High Court in the case of Ganesh Ram v. State of Bihar reported in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has been held that without asking for such a certificate the State cannot reject a claim for subsistence allowance. 10. In the case of M. Paul Anthony v. Bharat Gold Mines Ltd. (1999)ILLJ1094SC , this Court has held that a suspended employee is entitled to subsistence allowance as a relationship of employer-employee subsists. 11. For the above reasons, we hold that the Appellant is entitled to receive subsistence allowance, which should have been paid to her husband. As the only ground for not paying the subsistence allowance is that a certificate required by Rule 96(2) has not been, furnished, we direct the Appellant to file an affidavit Stating therein that her husband was not engaged in any other employment, business, profession ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
