Central Administrative Tribunal
Billa Vijaya Kumari J Chennamma vs SURVEY OF INDIA on 31 December 2024
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
HYDERABAD BENCH, HYDERABAD
ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.021/02377/2024
HYDERABAD, this the, 31st Day of December, 2024
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. VARUN SINDHU KUL KAUMUDI, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER
Billa Vijaya Kumari @ J.Chennamma
Aged 53 years, D/o J.Chennakesavulu
R/o K.Albert Cichard, H.No.19-100/1
Street No.7, Malkajgiri, Hyderabad.
…..Applicant
(By Advocate Sri Shaik Hameed)
Vs.
1. The Surveyor General (HQ)
Survey of India, Dehradun
Uttarakhand, India – 248001.
2. The Addl.Surveyor General
Indian Institute of Surveying & Mapping (IISM)
Survey of India, Uppal, Hyderabad.
3. The Regional Pay & Accounts Officer
Survey of India, Ministry of Science & Technology Block-A, II Floor, Kendriya Sadan Sulthan Bazar, Koti, Hyderabad.
4. The Union of India rep. by its Secretary Department of Science and Technology Technology Bhavan, New Delhi-110 016.
….Respondents
(By Advocate Smt.B.Gayatri Varma, Sr.CGSC)
*****
PANDIRLAPA
LLI SANDHYA
Page 1 of 3
ORAL ORDER
PER: HON’BLE MR. VARUN SINDHU KUL KAUMUDI, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER
1. By this Original Application, the applicant is seeking the following relief: “.....to declare the action of the Respondents in not paying the family pension to the applicant herein, after death of the petitioner’s father and mother, though the applicant has submitted all the required documents and the same were forwarded by the 2nd respondent to the 3rd Respondent vide Proc.No.B-875/5-A- 855/IIS&M, dated 10.5.2018 itself for payment of family pension, the same as highly illegal, arbitrary and in contrary to the rules and consequential the Hon’ble Tribunal may please to declare that the applicant herein is entitled for family pension regularly, with arrears from the year 2004 and may pass such order or orders, in the interest of justice.”
2. Heard both the parties.
3. In the present case, the department is fully seized of the matter. The department had stated in their reply to the legal notice, dt.30.11.2021, on behalf of the applicant, through their letter, dt.30.12.2021, that ‘it is requested to advice your client to wait for the response from the Bank and not to proceed legally as this office is duty bound to process her case on priority basis’. The letter, dt.01.12.2023, of the Additional Surveyor General to the Senior Accounts Officer, Regional Pay & Accounts Office, Survey of India, Hyderabad, contains a request to accord top priority for sanction of
PANDIRLAPA LLI SANDHYA
Page 2 of 3
pension in respect of the applicant, Smt.Billa Vijaya Kumari, as the issue remains to be settled.
4. Considering the fact that the department, as a model employer, declared that it is duty bound to do the needful in this case and, since the learned Counsel for the Applicant states that they have already furnished the documents which have been forwarded by the office of Addl.Surveyor General, IISM to the Sr.Accounts Officer, RP & AO, SOI, Hyderabad on 29.11.2018 (Ann.A7) itself and further documents have also been submitted by the applicant, vide her letter, dt.26.08.2019 (Ann.A9), to the department, the competent authority among the respondents is directed to settle the issue regarding sanction of family pension to the applicant, as per rules, within a period of three(3) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
5. With the above observations, the OA is disposed of, at the admission stage. However, there shall be no order as to costs.
(Varun Sindhu Kul Kaumudi)
Administrative Member
31.12.2024 /ps/
PANDIRLAPA LLI SANDHYA
Page 3 of 3
Loading citations and judicial treatment…