Interest on family pension arrears not payable from stoppage date if delay not solely due to department; limited to period from writ filing when balancing record discrepancy, impersonation, and inquiry findings.

JUDGMENT :

Manoj Kumar Gupta, C.J.

Delay Condonation Application (IA/1/2025)

1. The appellants, by means of instant appeal, have challenged the order of learned Single Judge dated 30.04.2024 by which WPSS No.1122 of 2016, “ Smt. Kaushalya Negi Alias Sona Devi Vs. Union of India and Others ” was allowed to the extent of award of interest @ 7% on the arrears of pension, and also the order dated 03.04.2025, passed on the recall application of the appellants.

2. The office has reported a delay of 446 days in filing the instant appeal, reckoning the limitation from the date of original order in the writ petition i.e. from 30.04.2024.

3. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the application filed by the appellants for modification of the order of the learned Single Judge to the extent of award of interest, came to be rejected on 03.04.2025 and, thereafter, some time was spent in seeking legal advice. He submits that the delay is bonafide and not on account of any laches on part of the department. He submits that in such circumstances the delay deserves to be condoned.

4. Learned counsel for the contesting respondent Shri Pawan Mishra states that he does not wish to file any counter affidavit but has orally opposed the delay condonation application.

5. As we find that the modification /recall application was dismissed only on 03.04.2025 and, thereafter, the appellants filed the appeal though with some delay, which has been sufficiently explained, therefore, in the interest of justice, we condone the same and direct the office to allocate a regular number to the instant appeal.

6. Heard learned counsel for the parties on the appeal.

7. The writ petition filed by the contesting respondent (hereinafter referred to as “the writ-petitioner”) was for a direction to the appellants to make regular payment of family pension to the petitioner and also pay arrears since November, 2013 along with interest @ 18% per annum. The petitioner was getting regular family pension after the death of her husband Ram Singh Negi on 23.01.2011. In November, 2013, the pension was stopped by Punjab National Bank, Branch Adhoiwala, District Dehradun, the Distributing Branch, noticing that in the Pension Payment Order (PPO) of late Ram Singh Negi, the deceased husband of the petitioner, name of his wife was recorded as Sona Devi and not that of the petitioner i.e. Kaushalya Negi while the life certificate furnished by the petitioner, was singed by her.

8. It is worthwhile to note that Sona Devi was the first wife of late husband of the petitioner and, according to the case of the petitioner, the marriage between her late husband and Sona Devi was dissolved by an order passed by the District Judge, Tehri Garhwal in Original Suit No.27 of 2005 dated 14.12.2006. The petitioner, therefore, had claimed right to receive family pension as a widow.

9. It is not disputed before us that in the service record of the deceased husband of the petitioner name of his first wife i.e. Sona Devi was recorded and it appears that the same was not got changed by the deceased husband of the petitioner during his lifetime. In the pension payment order also name of Sona Devi was mentioned but, at the time of preparation of pension papers he submitted a joint photograph with a lady showing her as his wife and it was that of the petitioner.

10. This discrepancy was noticed by the bank from the life certificate filed by the petitioner which bore her signatures. Consequently, it stopped the release of pension. It has also come on record that,