KM. KSHETRIMAYUM PREMILA DEVI v. STATE OF MANIPUR AND 5 OTHERS
Court: High Court of Manipur
Bench: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE A.GUNESHWAR SHARMA
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Manipur judgment dated 2024-08-05. KM. KSHETRIMAYUM PREMILA DEVI v. STATE OF MANIPUR AND 5 OTHERS. Read the judgment and case details on...
Judgment text
Digitally signed by JOHN JOHN TELEN KOM Date: 2024. 08. 21 TELEN KOM 07:53:20 +05'30' Item No. 12 IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR AT IMPHAL WP(C)No. 505 of 2021 KM. Kshetrimayum Premila Devi …Petitioner - Versus- State of Manipur & 5 Ors. …Respondents BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A. GUNESHWAR SHARMA O R D E R 05. 08. 2024. [1] Heard Mr. CH. Robinchandra, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Shyam Sharma, learned GA for the State respondents and Mr. S. Jasobanta, learned counsel for respondent No. 6. [2] The case of the petitioner is about the benefits of the Family Pension in terms of the O. M. Dated 17. 05. 2011 issued by the Government of Manipur. [3] The Father of the petitioner was working as Assistant Jailor in Manipur Central Jail, Government of Manipur and retired on 01. 07. 1993 and expired on 01. 11. 2014 and the petitioner is unmarried daughter of the retired pensioner in terms of the order dated 04. 07. 2015 passed by the Family Court Manipur in Mat. (Declaratory) Suit No.
27 of 2015. [4] Mr. Shyam Sharma, learned GA draws the attention of this Court to Office Memorandum dated 16. 09. 2015 issued by the State Government of Manipur where unmarried/widowed/divorced daughter of the State Government employees who retired prior to 01. 01. 2006 are not eligible for Family Pension. He further submits that Family Pension benefits cannot be extended to the petitioner in terms of the O. M. Dated 16. 09. 2015. [5] Mr. CH. Robinchandra, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he may be permitted to withdraw the present writ petition with liberty to file fresh one for challenging the O. M. dated 16. 09. 2015. [6] Mr. Shyam Sharma, learned GA for the State respondents and Mr. S. Jasobanta, learned counsel for respondent No. 6 have no objection. [7] Recording the submissions made at the bar, writ petitions is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to approach appropriate forum as per rules. JUDGE John Kom
Source: Supreme Court eSCR. Dataset: Dattam Labs, CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.