By the Court.—Heard Sri Ajay Rajendra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri R. K. Rai, leaned counsel for the respondents.

2. By means of this writ petition the petitioner has come up before this Court with the following prayers:

“(i) to issue a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 5.9.2012 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal Allahabad in Original Application No. 216 of 2012 Smt.Kamlesh v. Union of India and others and order dated 23.12.2011 passed by respondent No. 3 rejecting the claim of the petitioner for Extraordinary Pension on account of untimely death of her husband in Parliament Election duty (Anneuxre No. 1 and 2) to the writ petition.

(ii) to issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent No. 3 to pay Extraordinary Pension to the petitioner.

(iii) to issue any other order or direction to the respondents to which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit under the circumstances of the case.

(iv) award cost of the writ petition.”

3. The petition has been filed for challenging the order of the Tribunal on various grounds. One of the ground is to the effect that Tribunal has not taken into consideration the risk factor involving in the election duty specifically at polling area, which is communally hit and there was an acute pressure, stress and high risk to person’s life, safety and security of polling materials, electronics machines, ballot papers etc. Presence of political muscle men on the Polling Station are direct threat to life etc. are adopted by the supporters of rival candidates and dirty party politics.

4. Election is the essence of a democracy. Free and fair elections are the tools on which democracy thrives. The personnel, who conduct the elections are as important as the election itself for maintenance of democracy. Free and fair election can be conducted only with the help of honest, brave and risk taking officials/officers who go on polling duties. The poll booths in India are no gardens of peace. They are battle field between rival political parties. Experience shows that these political wars turn into ugly war of muscle and money power. Physical violence is a routine and often results in serious causalities. People have lost their lives, property and other valuable rights in poll violence. In these situations, the polling officers have to conduct the elections and for some purpose, some perks have been evolved. The elections officers are assured that if something happens to them their families will be taken care of. Extraordinary pension is one of such assurances given to the poling officers. There is no doubt that these have to be governed by rules. The rules have to be interpreted honestly, benevolently and with magnanimity. Arbitrary denial of emoluments due to a person who has lost his life on election duty will only demoralize the officers who have to be sent on duty again.

5. The petitioner has forcefully argued that these aspects have been totally over looked by the Tribunal and the rules have been interpreted in the cursory manner.

6. Sri R.K. Rai, learned counsel for the Union of India has filed counter-affidavit and has stressed on the basis of instructions that the extra ordinary pension is not covered under the C.C.S. (Extra Ordinary Pension) Rule-Appendix-3. It has also argued that there is no record to prove that the death was hastened or invariable caused by the duty that the deceased Dharam Pal Singh was required to undertake. Sri R. K. Rai has further argued on the strength of para 4 of the counter-affidavit that the cause of death could not be ascertained from the post-mortem as is clear from the post-mortem report. Further the cause of death as mentioned in the panchnama is abdominal pain and as per the State Election Officer letter F.190/CEO-3 dated 19th September 2008 the cause of death was due to heart attack. The representation dated 18th October 2011 of the petitioner, has been exa