The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of the eligibility criteria for widow pension under the Haryana Pension to Widows and Destitute Women Scheme Rules, 1988-1989, and the distinction between family pension under service rules and pension under special schemes formulated by the State.

JUDGMENT

Lisa Gill, J. - This writ petition has been filed seeking quashing of memo dated 17.11.2017, Annexure P8 calling upon the petitioner to deposit the amount released to her towards widow pension under the 'Haryana Pension to Widows and Destitute Women Scheme Rules, 1988-1989' on the ground that she had solemnized marriage/Kareva marriage with her brother-in-law (Devar) Dalbir Singh and thus had received the said amount though not entitled to it after her remarriage.

2. It is the petitioner's case that her husband, who was a labourer by profession died on 04.04.2007. His death certificate is attached as Annexure PI. The petitioner, who claimed to be a poor lady belonging to the Harijan community claimed pension under the Widow Pension Scheme i.e., one of the social security schemes of the State of Haryana. The petitioner was afforded pension under the said scheme (Annexure P2). She claimed to be totally dependant upon the widow pension and her father-in-law as well as brother-in-law (Devar), namely, Dalbir, who was unmarried at that time. Petitioner performed Kareva marriage with her brother-in-law, namely, Dalbir and a daughter was born out of the wedlock on 28.01.2011. The petitioner's father-in-law is stated to be working with some landlord in a nearby village. A dispute arose between the petitioner's father-in-law with one Gian Chand son of Puran Chand in respect to which an application was submitted by her father-in-law (Annexure P7). Due to the said incident, Gian Chand submitted a complaint alleging that the petitioner was withdrawing widow pension in an illegal manner having solemnized a second marriage with her Devar (brother-in-law). Widow pension being released to the petitioner was accordingly stopped and vide impugned order/memo dated 17.11.2017 (Annexure P8), recovery of Rs. 1,82,727/-with interest at the rate of 12% per annum was demanded from the petitioner. Aggrieved therefrom, this writ petition has been filed.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner argues that pension was granted to the petitioner, who was rendered a widow on the death of her husband on 04.04.2017. Pension under the social security schemes, Annexure P2, was released to her being a destitute woman. Kareva marriage was performed by the petitioner with her brother-in-law (Devar), namely, Dalbir Singh. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner is entitled to receive the pension despite her Kareva marriage. He relies upon decision dated 22.04.2014 in CWP No. 10344 of 2013 (Ramrati Devi vs. State of Haryana and others) and 05.09.2009 in CWP No.17970 of 2008 (Shanti Devi vs. State of Haryana and by coordinate Bench of this Court. It is further contended that there is no bar in the scheme for release of the pension to a widow who remarries subsequently and in any case, a Kareva marriage does not translate to remarriage. Notice for recovery of the amount from the petitioner, it is submitted, is clearly unjustified in the facts and circumstances of the case. It is urged that the said notice has been actuated due to mala fides and active connivance of respondent No.4 with the officials. It is, thus, prayed that this writ petition be allowed. Notice dated 17.11.2017 be quashed and the official respondents be directed to continue releasing the widow pension to the petitioner, besides, releasing the arrears thereof to her. It is thus prayed that this writ petition be allowed.

4. Per contra, learned counsel for the State argues that the scheme in question is meant to help a widow to tide over the difficult circumstances which may arise on the death of her husband and to prove social security to a woman who is unable to sustain herself from her own resources and is in need of financial assistance being rendered a destitute. It is further stated that the petitioner herself had approached the department and submitted an application on 24.08.2017 stating that she had remarried and did not wish to receive the widow pension any longer a