Disclaimer: This has been reported after the availability of the order of the Court and not on media reports so as to give an accurate report to our readers.
Delhi High Court: In a writ petition seeking quashment of the communication requiring a succession certificate and a direction for release of the arrears with interest on the basis of an indemnity bond, a Single-Judge Bench of Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav, J., held that where legal heirship is clear, undisputed, supported by appropriate documentary proof and no rival claimants, demand for succession certificate release of pensionary or retiral dues unjustified. The Court directed the respondents to release the arrears based on the survivorship certificate.
The petitioners are the children and legal heirs of the deceased, a retired officer of the Central Government who superannuated on 31 December 2000. During service he was due for promotion to the Junior Administrative Grade in the Indian Civil Accounts Service, but the promotion was withheld because a criminal case was pending against him. He was subsequently acquitted in 2012.
After acquittal he sought grant of promotional and consequential pensionary benefits. The request was declined on the ground that he had already retired. The High Court by order dated 10 July 2020 allowed his petition. The Government’s challenge before the Supreme Court by way of special leave petition (SLP) was dismissed by order dated 7 January 2021.
Pursuant thereto, the respondents issued an order granting him retrospective promotion with effect from 24 April 2000 along with refixation of pay and revision of pension. The order was issued posthumously and arrears amounting to ₹3,85,684 became payable. Relying on Office Memoranda dated 10 July 2013 and 6 April 2022, the authorities insisted upon production of a succession certificate for release of the arrears.
The petitioners had already produced a survivorship certificate and asserted that there were no rival claimants. Aggrieved by the insistence on a succession certificate, the petition filed the present writ petition.
The Court examined the office memoranda and found that they do not envisage insistence on a succession certificate as a matter of course. It was noted that the instructions themselves contemplate release of arrears, retiral benefits, pensionary dues and compensation, when rival or competing claims are absent, identity and entitlement of the legal heirs are clearly verified, without requiring a succession certificate.
“A succession certificate ought not to be insisted upon as a matter of course where the legal heirship is undisputed and stands duly established.”
The Court held that in absence of any specific requirement under both the office memorandums insistence on production of a succession certificate is not called for. It directed the respondents to act upon the petitioners’ request and release the amount based on the survivorship certificate.
[Dinesh Kumar v. Union of India, W.P.(C) 10594/2022, decided on 10-2-2026]
*Judgment by Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav
Advocates who appeared in this case :
Mr Vidya Sagar and Mr Amolak, Counsel for the Petitioners
Mr. Manish Kumar, SPC with Ms. Pragya Bharti, Counsel for the Respondents