Jaipur, Rajasthan v. Department, Government Secretariat, Jaipur

: Mr. Chiranji Lal Saini For Respondent(s) : Mr. Dheeraj Tripathi, AGC HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND SHARMA Order 13/08/2025

1. In the present writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a direction against the respondents to release service benefits of Late Shri Bahadur Singh in relation to gratuity, family pension, GPF, state insurance, accidental insurance and leave encashment in favour of the petitioner.

2. It has been stated that Late Shri Bahadur Singh was holding the post of 'Beldar' in the Office of Assistant Engineer, Public Works Department, District Sub-Division South, Jaipur. During his life time, by way of executing registered adoption deed dated 18.10.2004, petitioner was adopted by Late Shri Bahadur Singh as a son. The aforesaid adoption has taken place in [2025:RJ-JP:32384] (2 of 5) [CW-16036/2009] accordance with the provisions of Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956 (for short, 'the Act of 1956'). It was further submitted that thereafter, Shri Bahadur Singh expired on 10.07.2005. As there was a short time gap between the registered adoption deed and death of Late Shri Bahadur Singh, nomination of the petitioner in the official record of Late Shri Bahadur Singh could not take place.

3. After death of Late Shri Bahadur Singh, the petitioner claimed all the terminal and service benefits in respect of service rendered by Late Shri Bahadur Singh, yet for no plausible reason such benefits were not extended by the respondents and he was advised to obtain proper orders from the Court.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that thereafter, the petitioner filed one application under Section 372 of Indian Succession Act, 1925 (for short, 'the Act of 1925') for obtaining succession certificate in respect of service benefits of Late Shri Bahadur Singh relating to PF, gratuity, pension, insurance etc. Such application filed by the petitioner was allowed by learned District Judge, Jaipur City Jaipur vide order dated

21.05.2009. Despite possessing the succession certificate, when the petitioner was not granted the aforesaid benefits, he filed the instant writ petition.

5. It has also been submitted that after filing of the writ petition, the petitioner also instituted one suit for declaration in the Court of Additional Civil Judge and Metropolitan Magistrate, West Jaipur Metropolitan. In the aforesaid suit, judgment and decree dated 20.11.2014 was passed by Competent Civil Court declaring that the petitioner was the adopted son of Late Shri [2025:RJ-JP:32384] (3 of 5) [CW-16036/2009] Bahadur Singh. Hence, as per petitioner, he is entitled for the service benefits of Late Shri Bahadur Singh but the respondents are arbitrarily denying such benefits.

6. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents vehemently opposed the writ petition by stating that during lifetime of Late Shri Bahadur Singh, it was never disclosed that the petitioner was his adopted son and rather there was nomination in favour of one Smt. Saraswati Devi in the service record of Late Shri Bahadur Singh, who was shown as wife of Late Shri Bahadur Singh. It has been submitted that in the adoption deed produced by the petitioner there was no reference of Smt. Saraswati Devi, who ought to have been shown as his adopted mother. As there were factual disputes with regard to rightful hand to receive the service benefits of Late Shri Bahadur Singh, hence, quite rightly the benefits were not allowed to the petitioner.

7. In rejoinder, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there was no such person namely Smt. Saraswati Devi as alleged by wife of Late Shri Bahadur Singh and rather he was an unmarried person. Even on enquiry made by the respondents themselves, no whereabouts of said Smt. Saraswati Devi could be traced out. Thus only on account of an erroneous entry in the service record, the legitimate right of the petitioner cannot be prejudiced, more so, when there is no rival claim by any other person contrary to claim raised by the petitioner.

8. I have heard the learned counsels for both the parties and perused the record.

9. The petitioner has placed registered adoption deed, in order to prove that he was the adopted son of Late Shri Bahadur [2025:RJ-JP:32384] (4 of 5) [CW-16036/2009] Singh. Such adoption deed executed on 18.10.2004 has been duly registered with the Office of Sub-Registrar-II, Registration and Stamps Department, Jaipur.

10. In this regard, reference of the Section 16 of the Act of 1956 is relevant, which reads as under: "16. Presumption as to registered documents relating to adoption.- Whenever any document registered under any law for the time being in force is produced before any court purporting to record an adoption made and is signed by the person giving and the person taking the child in adoption, the court shall presume that the adoption has been made in compliance with the provisions of this Act unless and until it is disproved."

11. Bare perusal of the provisions of Section 16 of the Act of 1956 would make it clear that in the cases where the adoption deed has been validly registered and is signed by the person giving and the person taking the child in adoption, the Court shall presume that the adoption has been made in compliance with the provisions of the Act, unless and until it is disproved.

12. On perusal of the adoption deed, it is evident that all the formalities have been completed and the adoption deed is duly registered. No document whatsoever has been placed on record by the respondents contrary to the aforesaid adoption deed, nor such adoption deed has ever been challenged by any person, hence, it is still in force. Thus, in the light of provisions of Section 16 of the Act of 1956, this Court can validly draw a presumption with regard to adoption of petitioner by Late Shri Bahadur Singh.

13. Apart from above, the petitioner is also possessing the succession certificate dated 21.05.2009 issued by the Competent Court under the provisions of the Act of 1925 as well as the [2025:RJ-JP:32384] (5 of 5) [CW-16036/2009] judgment and decree dated 20.11.2014 passed by Civil Court, declaring the petitioner as adopted son of Late Shri Bahadur Singh. Under such circumstances and in view of aforesaid registered document as well as orders/decree passed by the Competent Court, which has attained finality, there is no scope for raising doubt by the respondents over the bona fides of the petitioner.

14. Under these circumstances, the petitioner being adopted son of Late Shri Bahadur Singh is entitled to receive the service benefits of the deceased.

15. In view of foregoing discussion and documents on record, the writ petition filed by the petitioner is hereby allowed. The respondents are directed to release the service benefits of Late Shri Bahadur Singh relating to gratuity, family pension, GPF, State insurance, accidental insurance and leave encashment in favour of the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, failing which the aforesaid benefits shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum.

16. Ordered accordingly. DAKSH/42 (ANAND SHARMA),J