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

2004 Supreme(Cal) 608

High Court Of Calcutta
Aloke Chakrabarti, S. P. Talukdar
PRABIR MUKHERJEE - Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA - Respondent
W. P. C. T.  67  Of  2004
Decided On : 09/10/2004

Advocates Appeared:
CHHABI ROY, JAYMALYA BAGCHI, L.VISHAL KUMAR, MILAN CHANDRA BHATTACHARJI, RAJ DIP ROY

A husband is entitled to the pension benefits of his deceased wife, a railway employee, under Section 15 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, and Rule 74(4) of the Railway Services (Pension) Rules, 1993.

Headnote:

HINDU SUCCESSION ACT, 1956 - SECTION 15 - RAILWAY SERVICES (PENSION) RULES, 1993 - RULE 74(4) - SUCCESSION - SPOUSE - PENSION BENEFITS - SPOUSE'S ENTITLEMENT: A husband is entitled to the pension benefits of his deceased wife, a railway employee, under Section 15 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, as he is a part of her family as per Rule 74(4) of the Railway Services (Pension) Rules, 1993.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, the husband of a deceased railway employee, filed an application before the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) seeking to be added as a party in a proceeding initiated by his mother-in-law for the settlement of dues and release of benefits arising out of the death of his wife. The CAT allowed the petitioner to be added as a party but later directed him to produce a Succession Certificate before the railway authorities.

Finding of the Court:

The Calcutta High Court held that the petitioner, as the husband of the deceased railway employee, is entitled to the pension benefits under Section 15 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, and Rule 74(4) of the Railway Services (Pension) Rules, 1993. The court found that the earlier nomination made by the deceased employee in favor of her mother before her marriage became invalid after her marriage, and that the mother-in-law's claim based on the earlier nomination lacked merit.

Issues: 1. Whether the petitioner, as the husband of the deceased railway employee, is entitled to the pension benefits. 2. Whether the earlier nomination made by the deceased employee in favor of her mother before her marriage is valid.

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court relied on Section 15 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, which provides that the property of a female Hindu dying intestate devolves upon her husband, among others. 2. The court also relied on Rule 74(4) of the Railway Services (Pension) Rules, 1993, which defines "family", in relation to a railway servant, to include the husband in the case of a female railway servant.

Final Decision: The court allowed the petitioner's application and directed the railway authorities to settle the claim of dues and death benefits in favor of the petitioner within three months from the date of communication of the order.

S. P. TALUKDAR, J.

( 1 ) THE present application is directed against order dated 23rd September, 2003 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal' in M. A. No. 15 of 2003, (0. A. No. 739 of 2002 ).

( 2 ) GRIEVANCES of the petitioner may briefly be stated as follows: petitioner, an U. D. Assistant in the Panda. R. Department, Government of west Bengal, got married to Runu Mukherjee, since deceased on 18. 06. 1998. After marriage they have been residing together as husband and wife. The said Runu Mukherjee was suffering from mental imbalance since prior to her marriage and, for this, she was under medical treatment. On 08. 04. 2002, she, while residing with her parents committed suicide by jumping on the track of Metro Railway at Jatin Das Park Station. Respondent No. 5 intimated the Officer-in-Charge of the Kalighat Police Station that they had no complaint against the petitioner in respect of such death. Petitioner handed over all the stridhan properties belonging to his wife, since deceased. and the same included the gold ornaments as well. The said wife of the petitioner was an employee of South Eastern Railway and by letter dated 27. 11. 2002 the petitioner approached the Railway authority to settle the dues and benefits arising out of death of his wife, Runu, who was a Railway employee. By letter dated 05. 12. 2002 the respondent No. 2 intimated the petitioner that the matter is sub-judice in O. A. No. 739 of 2002. On receipt of the same, the petitioner made enquiries and came to learn that the mother of his wife, since deceased, being respondent No. 5 filed an application under section 19 of the Administrative Tribunal Act seeking settlement of dues and release of the same on the strength of purported nomination made in her favour prior to her marriage with the petitioner. Railway authorities being respondent Nos. 1 to 4 filed an objection categorically stating therein that the present petitioner is the legitimate claimant of the said dues.

( 3 ) IN view of sub-rule (4) of Rule 74 of the Railway Services (Pension) Rules, 1993, the earlier nomination made before the marriage is invalid. Petitioner by filing an application being M. A. No. 15 of 2002 sought to be added as a party in the said proceeding and in response to the same, the Tribunal by order dated 02. 01. 2003 allowed the petitioner to be so added. Subsequently by order dated 23rd September, 2003, the Tribunal disposed of the matter with a direction upon the petitioner to produce a Succession Certificate before the respondent authorities.

( 4 ) BEING aggrieved by, and dissatisfied with, the said order dated 23rd september, 2003, the petitioner has filed instant application praying for setting aside of the same and for a direction upon the respondent authorities to settle the legitimate dues of the petitioner.

( 5 ) THOUGH much was sought to be stated regarding the suicidal death of the wife of the petitioner, it is perhaps not necessary to mention that then is hardly any scope for this Court within the scope of the present application to entertain such grievances. Every premature death is, no doubt, unfortunate and more so, when it is accidental or suicidal. But every suicidal death cannot carry a presumption of guilt against the near and dear ones of the victim. In the present case it appears that the mother-in-law of the victim by her letter dated 9th april, 2002 addressed to O. C. , Kalighat Police Station intimated that there is no grievance against the husband of the said deceased and no complaint was lodged by them.

( 6 ) ON the other hand, attention of the Court was drawn to the fact that the stridhan properties including the gold ornaments belonging to the wife of the petitioner, since deceased, were handed over to respondent No. 5 or her representatives. In any way, we are hardly concerned about that aspect within the scope and ambit of the present application.

( 7 ) IT appears from the materials on record









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