Rajul Rajendra Nath Dubey vs Managing Director

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:86207
1 WP-24789-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR

BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK KUMAR SINGH
th
ON THE 27 OF OCTOBER, 2026
WRIT PETITION No. 24789 of 2025
CNR No.: MPHC010447272025
RAJUL RAJENDRA NATH DUBEY
Versus
MANAGING DIRECTOR AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Puneet Chaturvedi - Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri Anoop Nair - Senior Advocate with Ms. Aparna Sthapak -
Advocate for the respondents.
ORDER
By way of this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, the petitioner is seeking following reliefs :-
"I. Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the
Respondent No.2 to grant/provide the family pension to
the petitioner as soon as possible, to secure the ends of
justice.
II. Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the
concerned Respondents to grant DCRG, family pension,
GPF, Swa Suraksha Nidhi Society and all subsequent
other service benefits in favour of petitioner as soon as
possible.
III. Issue any other writ, order or direction as this
Hon’ble Court deems fit."
2. The brief facts relevant for determination of the controversy are
that the petitioner’s wife, late Smt. Vimla Patel (subsequently Smt. Vimla
Dubey), was substantively employed as a Senior Stenographer in the office
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PARITOSH
KUMAR
Signing time: 28-10-2026
18:08:59

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:86207
2 WP-24789-2025
of respondent No.2. During her lifetime, upon her marriage to the petitioner,

the requisite change of name and status was duly notified in the Madhya
Pradesh Official Gazette vide Notification No. AS/MPPTCL/2532 dated
09.10.2006, and the petitioner’s name was formally recorded in the official
service record/book as her husband and nominee. Smt. Vimla Dubey passed
away on 14.04.2022. A representation preferred by a third party claiming
through the maternal side stood inquired into and rejected by the department.
Consequent upon directions issued in earlier proceedings (W.P. No.
16720/2022 and W.P. No. 33895/2024), terminal dues like DCRG, GPF, and
leave encashment were placed in fixed deposit receipts pending succession
proceedings. However, by the impugned order dated 04.04.2025, the
respondents extended the insistence of a Succession Certificate even to the
release of monthly family pension, withholding the same and retaining
accrued pension in fixed deposits.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that family pension does
not form part of the estate of the deceased employee, nor does it constitute a
debt or security within the meaning of Section 370/372 of the Indian
Succession Act, 1925. It is a recurring statutory right created for the
maintenance and survival of the dependent family members under the
governing service rules. Hence, insistence on a Succession Certificate for
grant of family pension is wholly perverse, arbitrary, and contrary to the
settled principles of law.
4. Learned counsel for respondents referring to their reply contends
that in compliance with the order dated 21.08.2023 passed in W.P. No.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PARITOSH
KUMAR
Signing time: 28-10-2026
18:08:59

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:86207
3 WP-24789-2025
16720/2022, the amounts were kept in FDR and the Succession Case MJC

SUC No. 115/2022 instituted by the petitioner was dismissed for non-
appearance/default on 17.11.2025. He further contends that Smt. Devaniya
Bai has filed an MJC for modification/review (Annexure R/3) and in the
absence of an adjudication of succession rights, the department cannot
disburse the benefits.
5. In rebuttal, the petitioner points out in his rejoinder that he has
already filed a review/restoration application registered as MJC No.
1294/2025 against the dismissal order dated 17.11.2025, which is sub-judice
and the succession case pertained to terminal benefits (GPF, GIS, leave
encashment, etc.) whereas family pension is governed strictly by the statutory
rules and can never be withheld for want of a succession certificate.
6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
7. The grant and regulation of family pension in the respondent-
establishment are governed by Rule 47 of the Madhya Pradesh Civil Services
(Pension) Rules, 1976. Under Rule 47 Sub-rule (6) read with Rule 47 Sub-
rule (8) of the Rules of 1976, family pension is payable in the first instance
to the surviving widow or widower until death or remarriage. Rule 47(8)
specifically delineates the priority and sequence of sanction: where a
deceased government servant/employee leaves behind a surviving spouse
(widow/widower), the family pension becomes payable directly to such
surviving spouse. It is a trite law settled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in
Jodh Singh v. Union of India, (1980) 4 SCC 306 and reiterated consistently
by this Court, that family pension is a social welfare measure and a statutory
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PARITOSH
KUMAR
Signing time: 28-10-2026
18:08:59

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:86207
4 WP-24789-2025
benefit conferred directly on the surviving dependents. The employee has no

disposing power over the family pension during lifetime, nor does it form an
inheritable estate or asset of the deceased to which the provisions of
succession certification apply. Family pension is not part of the estate of the
deceased employee; it is a recurring social welfare benefit governed strictly
by statute (G.L. Bhatia v. Union of India, (1999) 5 SCC 237 ). A Succession
Certificate under Section 372 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 applies
only to debts and securities, not to recurring monthly family pension.
8. The direction in W.P. No. 16720/2022 to keep amounts in an FDR
applied to static, terminal retiral benefits under title dispute, not recurring
monthly family pension necessary for livelihood.
9. Accordingly, the petition is allowed and the impugned order dated
04.04.2025 (Annexure P/7) is quashed. The respondents are directed to
sanction and disburse the statutory family pension to the petitioner pursuant
to Rule 47(8) of the Pension Rules, together with all accumulated arrears
from 14.04.2022 (including any pensionary component held in FDR along
with accrued interest) within 60 days from the receipt of this order. It is
further directed that Regular monthly family pension shall continue to be
paid to the petitioner in accordance with law.
1 0 . It is further directed that the respondents shall continue to pay
regular current monthly family pension to the petitioner month by month in
accordance with the Pension Rules.
11. It is clarified that this order is confined to the entitlement and
disbursement of family pension and does not affect the adjudication of other
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PARITOSH
KUMAR
Signing time: 28-10-2026
18:08:59

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:86207
5 WP-24789-2025
terminal dues governed by the pending succession proceedings before the

competent Civil Court.
12. No order as to costs.
(VIVEK KUMAR SINGH)
JUDGE
PK

Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PARITOSH
KUMAR
Signing time: 28-10-2026
18:08:59