SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1994 Supreme(SC) 929

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
B.L.Hansaria : Kuldip Singh
Kantadevi
Versus
Union Of India
Case No. : 294 of 1990
Date of Decision : 9/20/94
Advocates Appeared: Katiyar Anil : Kiran Shashi : Mahajan V.C. : Mohanty A.P. : Sabharwal S.K.

Advocates:
A.P.MOHANTY, ANIL KATIYAR, S.K.SABHARWAL, SHASHI KIRAN SHETTY, V.C.MAHAJAN

Headnote:Army Act, 1950, sec. 46, Army Instruction No. 51, Note (2)-ex-service man marrying alter his retirement from army-Note(2) Army Instruction No. 51 defined family which includes wife, laying down that marriage after retirement will not be recognised-widow of such ex-service man denied family pension-provision is a harsh and heartless and struck down as irrational-direction given to pay family pension to the widow.

       (Paras 2 & 3)

Judgment

B.L. HANSARIA, J.

(1) THE petitioner, a widow of an ex-serviceman, has made a grievance, and rightly, that she is not being paid family pension only because she was married to the ex-serviceman after his retirement from active service. This has come to happen because para 6 of the Army Instruction No. 51 of 1980 which has defined Family, though includes wife, says in Note (2 that marriage after retirement will not be recognised.

(2) THE petitioner has assailed the reasonableness of this provision and we have no difficulty in agreeing with the petitioner inasmuch we cannot countenance the stand and submission that marriages after retirement are performed with an eye to get family pension. This thinking is really abhorrent. As persons retire early from armed services, they remain of marriageable age in many cases and do need company of a consort to be with them in times of distress. As family pension becomes due on the death of the incumbent, the rider contained in the Note is indeed a harsh and heartless , provision, as it denies family pension to those who shared the difficulties the ex-servicemen faced after their retirement.

(3) IN view of the above, we strike down Note (2 because of its irrationality and direct the respondents to pay family pension to the petitioner, as if the aforementioned Army Instructions had not contained Note (2. All the required actions shall be taken within three months from today.

(4) THE petition is allowed accordingly. Cost assessed at Rs. 5,000.00.Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top