Back
2018 Supreme(Megh) 23
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA
Mohammad Yaqoob Mir, J.
Ms. Dhan Maya - Appellant
Vs.
Union of India - Respondent
WP(C) No. 326 of 2014
Decided On : 31-05-2018
For the Petitioner:Mr. S.U. Upadhaya, Advocate
For the Respondents: Mr. R. Debnath, CGC
The lack of knowledge about entitlement to family pension and the delay in claiming the benefits are not valid reasons to deny the claim. Absence of legal divorce proceedings invalidates the grounds of mutual divorce.
Headnote:
Pensionary Benefits - Family Pension Entitlement - Central Civil Services Pension Rules, 1972 - S.K. Mastan Bee v. General Manager, South Central Railway and Another (2003) 1 SCC 184
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, an illiterate widow, sought pensionary and other benefits due to her deceased husband's service in Assam Rifles. The respondents denied her claim based on the grounds of her elopement and alleged mutual divorce with her deceased husband.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner's lack of knowledge about her entitlement to family pension and the delay in claiming the benefits were not valid reasons to deny her claim. The court also rejected the grounds of elopement and mutual divorce, emphasizing the absence of legal divorce proceedings.
Issues: The issues revolved around the petitioner's entitlement to family pension, the grounds of elopement and mutual divorce, and the delay in claiming the benefits.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the precedent set in S.K. Mastan Bee v. General Manager, South Central Railway and Another, where a similar delay in claiming family pension was not treated as a bar for the claimant. The court also emphasized the absence of legal divorce proceedings to reject the grounds of mutual divorce.
Final Decision: The petition was allowed, and the impugned communications were quashed. The respondents were directed to release all unpaid retiral benefits and issue the Pension Payment Order in favor of the petitioner within eight weeks.
Mr. Mohammad Yaqoob Mir, J.
Instant case has its own peculiar features. In essence, the petitioner, an illiterate widow, has been clamouring for grant of pensionary and other benefits as were due to be received on the death of her husband.
2. The husband of the petitioner was enrolled in Assam Rifles on 15.10.1968 and was discharged on voluntary retirement w.e.f. 31.03.1991. His age at the time of discharge was 42 years 5 months 16 days. He had been decorated during his service with the following medals:
(i) Sainya Seva Medal,
(ii) Sena Medal,
(iii) 25th Independence Anniversary Medal and,
(iv) Police Duty (Special) Medal.
3. Her husband and his second wife namely, Mon Maya Newar, both died on 09.03.1993.
4. After the death of her husband, the pension and other benefits were not given to the petitioner by the respondents creating an impression that same shall not be allowable.
5. In pursuance to a resolution passed by the Board of Editors of 'Sudha' dated 25.08.2013, (an Assamese Literary Magazine), Mr. Jitu Kumar Nath, Editor along with his team with the object of helping the illiterate old aged men and women of Assam in the legal field, during the session of discussion with the public at the premises of Dimow Primary School situated at Dimow on 29.11.2014 were informed by the people that Smt. Dhan Maya (petitioner herein) is not getting any pensionary benefits. Petitioner informed the team that her husband was an employee of Assam Rifles and had rendered 22 years 5 months and 16 days of service. She was informed by many employees of Assam Rifles that she is not entitled to pension as same was not granted to her husband.
6. Said Executive Editor, Mr. Jitu Kumar Nath, noticing that she is an illeterate woman, suffering from several ailments and acute financial hardship, unaware of her right to family pension and then noticing lack of assistance and ignorance about the right to pension shall not be a bar for exercising her right, submitted a detailed representation to the Director General, Assam Rifles, Mahanideshalaya, Meghalaya, Shillong under his No. Sudha/WFPP/2014/F.No. 39/Sl.No.10 dated 08.04.2014 mentioning therein the details of husband of the petitioner and finally requested the said Director General to grant family pension to the petitioner without driving her to litigation. In response whereof, the said Editor was informed by the Record Officer vide his No. 112827/11 AR/PGC-2014/2376 dated 05.05.2014 that on scrutiny of service record of No. 112827 Ex Lnk (GD) Prem Kumar Chhetri, it is found that Smt. Dhan Maya (petitioner), first wife eloped with someone on 01.01.1985 during active service of the Rifleman. The Rifleman got re-married to Smt. Mon Maya on 22.01.1987 so she was the next of kin of the deceased. As per existing Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972 Smt. Dhan Maya is not entitled to grant of family pension.
7. Again, vide communication No. 112827/11 AR/UPAO/PGC/2014 168 dated 23.06.2014 the said Mr. Jitu Kumar Nath was informed by Lieutenant Colonel, Directorate General Assam Rifles that Smt. Dhan Maya (first wife of Prem Kumar Chhetri) had eloped with someone, then Prem Kumar Chhetri had remarried, so Smt. Dhan Maya is not entitled to grant of family pension. Both the two communications dated 05.05.2014 and 23.06.2014 are sought to be quashed.
8. It is pertinent to notice that the Editor of 'Sudha' had informed All Asom Gorkha Mohila Samitee about the stand taken by the Assam Rifles. The President, All Asom Gorkha Mohila Samitee submitted a representation on 09.07.2014 to the Director General Assam Rifles mentioning therein that they had enquired the matter and noticed the following facts:
(1) Late LNK (GD) 112827 Prem Kumar Chhetri retired from service w.e.f. 31/03/1991 (AN) and after that came to Sodiya, Sapakhua with her 1st and 2nd wife and after few months all are shifted to Silapathar.
(2) Late LNK (GD) 112827 Prem Kumar Chhetri to marry Man Maya compelled her 1st wife Dhan Maya placing her in a
