Listen to this article in summarized format
On February 5, 2026, the Allahabad High Court ruled that the legal representative of the deceased employee may always remain entitled to claim terminal dues including family pension by way of estate of the deceased.
Income Tax Guide
Income Tax Union Budget FY 2026-27 LiveIncome Tax Slabs FY 2025-26Income Tax Calculator 2025
This judgement came against the background of an appeal filed by Smt Tiwari who is a widow of a school teacher. A single bench high court judge had ruled against her by saying that she has no ground to claim her husband’s higher pension.
The issue of higher pension arose when her husband’s regularisation date was corrected to 1993 from 2000. As a result of this back dated correction, he was entitled to proportional pension, salary and other benefits. This is what she was seeking as he had passed away before the back dated correction could take place.
The husband had submitted representations and urged the authorities to consider his request for back dated correction of regularisation date. He retired from service on June 30, 2014 and died on July 21, 2022.
The order for this back-dated correction of regularisation came on January 21, 2019. The Regional Regularisation Committee, during its meeting, decided to correct the regularisation date to August 7, 1993 from December 30, 2000.
Not only that, but on July 1, 2019, a resolution was passed by the Finance & Accounts Officer, Office of DIOS, Prayagraj and a communication dated March 12, 2025 was issued by the DIOS, Prayagraj to the Principal of the DAV Inter College, Prayagraj where her late husband used to work. But still her request for her husband’s higher pension and other benefits was not honoured.
She told the high court that there was no positive direction to pay her the higher pension and other benefits at the time of filing this appeal in the high court. She also said that she wanted a direction to give effect to the Regional Regularization Committee order dated January 21, 2019 and she wasn’t asking for an order to regularise her husband’s position.
The Additional Chief Standing Counsel of the government told the high court that she was late in approaching the Court because while the husband had died on July 21, 2022, she had filed the writ petition only in 2025.
Justice Saumitra Dayal Singh and Justice Indrajeet Shukla of Allahabad High Court decided this judgement(SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. – 3 of 2026 ) on February 5, 2026.
Also read: If EPS 95 member dies before retirement, when will the spouse get pension and how much?
Widow has ground to claim her husband’s higher pension and other benefits
The Allahabad High Court said that it is difficult to sustain the order passed by the single judge that she had no locus standi to maintain the writ petition.
The Allahabad High Court said: “A legal representative of the deceased employee may always remain entitled to claim terminal dues including family pension by way of estate of the deceased.”
The high court said that in absence of any dispute as to her right to make such a claim, the observation of the single judge that she had no locus to claim such benefit is clearly erroneous.
Also read: No end in sight to pension pangs of widows and widowers
Husband pursued the matter during his lifetime and there was no delay
The high court said that as to the delay noted by the single judge, clearly an error on principle has occurred inasmuch as it is not her case that the claim had been made (with respect to the service rendered by her husband) with delay of seven years.
The high court said that in view of the resolution of the Regional Regularization Committee dated January 21, 2019, clearly providing that the decision on correcting the date of regularization of her late husband from December 30, 2000 to August 7, 1993, had already been made. Therefore, there was no issue of delay in making the claim.
The high court also said that regarding the claim for payment of pecuniary benefit arising from the resolution of the Regional Regularization Committee dated 21.07.2019, again, there was no delay.
Following the above referred resolution, the husband during his lifetime had pursued the matter, resulting in a communication dated 01.07.2019 being issued by the Finance & Accounts Officer, Office of DIOS, Prayagraj and communication letter dated 12.03.2025 issued by the DIOS, Prayagraj to the Manager/Principal of the DAV Inter College, Prayagraj.
HC rejects the state’s argument that the widow had approached the court too late
The Allahabad High Court said that as to the three-year delay attributed to the petitioner, they are unimpressed by the objection raised by the Additional Chief Standing Counsel to the extent that a order had already been passed and her objection was pending with the respondent; the prayer no. (e) prayed for had not been made with any laches, having been made well within three years from the last communication/acknowledgement dated March 12, 2025, issued by the DIOS, Prayagraj. The money claim being under active consideration, it deserves a decision.
Allahabad High Court judgement
- Accordingly, the order dated 10.10.2025 passed by the learned single judge is set aside.
- The present appeal and the writ petition are disposed of with a direction upon respondent nos. 3 and 4 to pass appropriate reasoned order and give all consequential benefits pursuant to the resolution of the Regional Regularization Committee dated 21.07.2019 (Annexure No. 5), as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of one month from today
Advocate Mayank Parashar, Legal Associate, Clasis Law told ET Wealth Online that in reaffirming settled principles of service jurisprudence, the Allahabad High Court recognised that the right to seek enforcement of accrued service and pensionary benefits is not extinguished with the death of the employee.
Parashar says: “Where such benefits form part of the employee’s estate, the legal representative is competent to pursue their enforcement. On this reasoning, the Court held that the widow and heir of late husband was entitled to maintain a writ petition seeking implementation of the regularisation resolution already passed in his favour, along with the consequential monetary and pensionary benefits that had accrued but remained unimplemented.”
According to Parashar, this approach finds support not only in statutory design but also in consistent judicial precedents, both of which recognise that accrued wages and social security benefits are payable to nominees or legal heirs, thereby affirming that such entitlements survive the employee and devolve as part of the estate.
aniltikotekar4sme.com 