Back
2020 Supreme(Online)(KER) 28481
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
K VINOD CHANDRAN, P. G. Ajithkumar, JJ
UNION OF INDIA – Appellant
Versus
V.GANGADHARAN – Respondent
OP (CAT)/168/2014
SRI.V.K.MOHAMMED YOUSUF, SC, RAILWAYS; SRI.DINESH CHERUKAT, SC, RAILWAYS; SRI.T.C.GOVINDA SWAMY; SMT.KALA T.GOPI; SMT.T.N.SREEKALA
Statutory compliance regarding death registration is crucial before amending nominee details in pension records; failing to adhere to this undermines legal provisions.
Headnote:
Registration - Family Pension Beneficiary - Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969 - Section 13, Section 23 - The court upheld the necessity of registration of death as a statutory compliance for updating beneficiary details in pension matters, emphasizing adherence to procedural norms established by law.
Fact of the Case:
The applicant, a retired railway employee, sought to amend his service records to include his new wife as a nominee after the death of his previous wife. He was denied this due to the lack of a death certificate for his wife's late husband.
Issues: Whether the lack of a death certificate for the husband of the applicant's current wife precluded the inclusion of her name as a beneficiary in pension records.
Ratio Decidendi: The court established that compliance with statutory requirements, including the production of a death certificate as mandated by law, is essential for changing nominees in pension records, thus upholding the authority's requirement.
Final Decision: The court set aside the Tribunal's order and allowed time for the applicant to secure the necessary death certificate.
JUDGMENT
P.V.Kunhikrishnan, J The respondents in OP(CAT) 168/2014 on the file of Central Administrative Tribunal are the petitioners in this Original Petition. The Original Petition was filed by the respondent/applicant herein for a declaration that the non- feasance on the part of the respondent to include the name of K.Sathyabhama as the applicant's wife, as a family pension beneficiary and for all other purpose like post retirement benefits, medical treatments etc is arbitrary, discriminatory contrary to law and unconstitutional. There were also other consequential reliefs also prayed for .
2. The case of the respondent/applicant before the Tribunal is that he is a retired railway employee, who superannuated on 31.12.2012, while working as Goods Guard(Traffic). According to the respondent/applicant, he married Smt.K.Sathyabhama, the elder sister of his wife late Sreedevi who died on 31.12.2011. Thereafter respondent /applicant submitted an application before the authorities, with a request to change the nominee in his service records. Death certificate of his first wife Sreedevi and marriage certificate evidencing his marriage with K.Sathyabhama were also produced along with the application. The grievance of the applicant is that, no action is taken by the authorities based on his request, eventhough he submitted all the documents before the authorities. In such circumstances, the above Original Application was filed before the Tribunal.
3. Before the Tribunal, the petitioners herein, who are respondents before the Tribunal, took a stand that the application of the respondent/applicant cannot be considered because, he has failed to produce the death certificate of the first husband of K.Sathyabhama. The admitted case of the applicant was that, the husband of K.Sathyabhama passed away on 7.2.1983 and the relatives of K.Sathyabhama had unwittingly failed to register his death. According to the petitioners/respondents, the failure of K.Sathyabhama and her relatives to register the death of her husband is a violation of statutory provisions contained in the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969 . As per Rule 21 of the Railway Servants Conduct Rules, 1966 , no railway servant shall enter into a contract of marriage with a person having a spouse living. When there is such a provision in the Rules, the petitioner/respondent insists that a death certificate of the husband of K.Sathyabhama, who is the present wife of the respondent/applicant, be produced for entering her as the nominee of the respondent/applicant.
4. There is a purpose in enacting the Registration of Births and Deaths Act 1969 (herein after mentioned as Act, 1969). The statement of objects and reasons will show the purpose of the enactment. Relevant portion of the statement of objects and reason is extracted here under:
The Central Government needs adequate and accurate countrywide registration data for purpose of national planning, organizing public health and medical activities and developing family planning programmes. Population is one of the most dynamic factors in the present economy of the country but it is here that information on trends furnished by the registration data is very defective and unreliable. The national interest requires an acceptable level of performance by the States and technical uniformity of the methods and standards used in the collection and compilation of data throughout the country. The Government therefore, consider that in order to develop a sound and unified system of registration in the country, Central Legislation is necessary on the subject.
5. The statement of objects and reasons shows that the Central Government needs adequate and accurate countrywide registration data for the purpose of national planning, organizing public health and medical activities and developing family planning programmes. Therefore, it is the duty of the person concerned to notify births and deaths and certifying cause of death. Information given to th
