mentally retarded son eligible for pension

yes, refer these cases

Bhagwanti Mamtani vs. Union of India and Ors

This is an appeal for the grant of family pension to Bhagwanti Mamtani on account of her being mentally disabled.

Facts

The lawyer on behalf of the UOI contended that Bhagwanti's father had died in 1976 whereas she had approached the Government of India for the grant of pension only in the year 1982.

According to him Bhagwanti's claim was delayed and therefore she was not entitled to any relief by the Court. It was also contended that the rule could not be made operative retrospectively, since the rule had come to force after her father had retired from service.

Observations of the Court

The Court directed the Psychiatry Department of the All India Institute of Medical Sciences to examine Bhagwanti in order to find out whether she was suffering from any disorder of the mind or the body because of which she was unable to earn her living even after the age of 21.

Thereafter the Psychiatrist examined her and submitted the report. The Court examined the report and according to the report she had a mental abnormality with dull average adaptive skills. It was stated that she would not be able to earn her living even after she attained the age of 21 years.

Based on this the Court held that she should be given family pension. With respect to the arguments extended by the lawyer on behalf of UOI, the Court opined that both the arguments had no merit. The Court directed the Government of India to grant family pension to Bhagwanti with effect from the date when she approached the Tribunal.

Further it was ordered that the arrears of pension should be paid within six months, failing which she would be entitled to earn interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the expiry of the six months. The Court also stated that she would not be liable to pay any further Court fees.

Accountant General vs. Shyson George

Filed under:Rule 90 of the Service Rules (Kerala), part III

Appellant:Accountant General

Respondent:Shyson George

Citation:2005 (2) KLT 137

Court:In the High Court of Kerala

Judges:Kurian Joseph and KR Udayabhanu

This is an appeal filed by the Accountant General against the order of the single judge to grant family pension to Shyson, a MR boy, following his father's death.

Facts

Shyson George was mentally retarded from birth. His father was a teacher in an aided Upper Primary School who retired from service on 31.08.1987 and subsequently died on 21.05.1988. Shyson's mother had passed away earlier. His brother-in-law made many efforts to get a family pension for Shyson. He approached the Civil Court to get a declaration that he was Shyson's legal guardian, competent to represent him.

In the meanwhile the Government issued an Order, which stated that in case of mentally retarded children a guardian could also apply for family pension. Thereafter, Shyson's brother-in law made an application and enclosed a certificate, which stated that Shyson was a mentally retarded person having an I.Q. below 50%. It was also certified that Shyson would be unable to earn his livelihood due to mental retardation.

According to Shyson, he was entitled to family pension from the day following the date his father's death, viz.22.5.1988. The Accountant General however took the stand that family pension could be granted to him only from the date on which he submitted the eligibility certificate, i.e. 8.07.1998. However, the pension sanctioning authority had granted pension to Shyson with effect from the date of his father's death.

In order to support this decision, the Accountant General relied on a Circular dated 17.2.2000 issued by the Government of Kerala. According to this circular, in case of family pension grants to dependent parents and major children, (under special circumstances and in absence of natural eligible heirs), the amount would be paid with effect from the date of issuance of eligibility certificates and would not accrue on the day following the day of death. The Government however also added two further clarifications:

1. The circular was “applicable to all cases henceforth”
2. Cases already settled would not be re-opened under any circumstances

    

Shyson then filed a petition before the Single Judge of the High Court. The Single Judge held that the delay in making the application was due to reasons not attributable to Shyson and further clarified that the circular would not apply to his case and that his case should be treated as having been settled prior to the date of issuance of the circular. In these circumstances the Single Judge issued a direction that Shyson was entitled to get family pension on the day following the date of his father's death.

The Accountant General then filed this appeal challenging the order of the Single Judge.

Observations of the Court

The Court observed that it was not the date on which the eligibility certificate was issued that was important; rather it was the date on which the disability was acquired. According to the Court, if the Shyson had been disabled prior to the death of his father then the State would have to continue the support from the date following the date of death of his father.

In this case, there were several certificates, which showed that Shyson was a mentally retarded person from birth. Hence, the Government would have to ignore the objection of the Accountant General. He was dependent on his father and this source of dependency was terminated after the death of his father. Shyson thus had to depend on the State from the day following his father's death.

The Court held that the State had a liability to pay pension to Shyson and gave directions to grant family pension to him with effect from 22.5.1988 within a period of six weeks. It was also made clear that in the event of delay beyond this period Shyson would be paid interest at the rate of 18% from 22.5.1988 and the officers responsible for the delay would be held personally liable. In these circumstances the Court dismissed the appeal.

Cases Referred:

• S.K. Mastan Bee vs. General Manager, South Central Railway, (2003) 1 SCC 184