Authorities must consider the legal heir’s claim for deceased employee’s pending service benefits within three months.

The applicant, Aysha, claimed service benefits allegedly due to her brother, Hussain Kunnudaruge, who died while in service on 20 June 2023.

The record included his death certificate, a legal-heirship certificate, and an affidavit executed by the legal heirs

The Agricultural Demonstration Unit addressed the Director of Agriculture seeking approval for disbursement of the deceased employee’s pending salary and other admissible benefits, including Death-cum-Retirement Gratuity (DCRG)

A medical reimbursement claim was also submitted

The applicant approached the Tribunal seeking consideration and release of the benefits.

Whether the respondents should consider the applicant’s claim for the deceased employee’s pending salary, DCRG, and other admissible service benefits in light of Annexure A4

Whether the applicant’s medical reimbursement claim contained in Annexure A5 should also be considered in accordance with law

The Tribunal applied the general administrative-law principle that a competent authority must consider a claim for service and retiral benefits in accordance with the applicable service rules and governing law.

It directed the respondents to examine the claim on the basis of the relevant documents, particularly Annexures A4 and A5, without expressing any final view on the applicant’s entitlement.

The Tribunal noted that the applicant had produced documents supporting her status as a legal heir and had relied on official communications concerning the deceased employee’s pending salary, admissible benefits, DCRG, and medical reimbursement

Since the respondents had not yet finally determined the claim, the Tribunal considered it appropriate to dispose of the Original Application at the threshold by requiring the competent authorities to undertake the necessary examination in accordance with law.

The direction preserved the respondents’ authority to determine eligibility and quantum while ensuring that the claims were considered within a fixed timeframe

Respondents 2 to 4, and the concerned authorities, were directed to consider the applicant’s claims in the light of Annexures A4 and A5 and in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible and, in any event, within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order

No order as to costs was made