IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL &

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALEE KRISHNA S.

TH MONDAY, THE 19 DAY OF MAY 2025 / 29TH VAISAKHA, 1947 WP(C) NO. 16811 OF 2025 PETITIONERS:

1 UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF DEFENCE, SOUTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI, PIN - 110011 2 ADDL DTE GENERAL OF PERSONNEL SERVICES INTEGRATED HEAD QUARTERS (ARMY), SOUTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI, PIN - 110011

3 OIC-RECORDS ,EME RECORDS, SECUNDERABAD, PIN - 900453

4 PRINCIPAL CONTROLLER OF DEFENCE ACCOUNTS (PENSIONS)

OFFICE OF THE PCDA (P), DRAUPATI GHAT, ALLAHABAD, PIN -

211014

5 EXCISE COMMISSIONER, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, OFFICE OF THE EXCISE COMMISSIONER, EXCISE COMPLEX, NANDVANAM, PALAYAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695033 BY ADV M.A.SHAJI, CGC SRI.C DINESH, CGC RESPONDENT:

C ROHINI, D/O EX LATE SEP K CHATHU KUTTY, MEETHALEPARAMBATH HOUSE, MAMBARAM P.O., PINARAYI, KANNUR DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN - 670741 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19.05.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

Muralee Krishna, J.

This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, challenging Ext.P3 order dated 29.07.2022 of the Armed Forces Tribunal, Regional Bench, Kochi (for short, ’the Tribunal’) in O.A.No.397 of 2018. The petitioners herein are the respondents, and the respondent herein is the applicant before the Tribunal.

2. Late Ex-Sepoy No.135528 K.Chathukutty was enrolled in the Indian Army on 11.05.1942 and discharged on 20.05.1944 on medical grounds. He died on 09.08.1962. Family pension was sanctioned to his wife Smt.C.Kallyani, who also died on 21.05.2009. After the death of Smt.C.Kallyani, the respondent approached the Army Authorities seeking family pension, claiming herself as an unmarried daughter of deceased K.Chathukutty. Her claim was rejected by the 3^rd petitioner, holding that the name of the respondent was not entered in the service documents of her late father. Being aggrieved, the respondent approached the Tribunal by filing O.A.No.397 of 2018, which was allowed by the impugned Ext.P3 order.

3. Heard Sri. M.A. Shaji, the learned Central Government Counsel for the petitioners on admission.

4. The learned Central Government Counsel would submit that the respondent's claim before the Tribunal is a belated one. Moreover, the respondent has not produced any document before the Tribunal to prove that she is the daughter of late K. Chathukutty.

5. We have appreciated the arguments of the learned Central Government Counsel and the materials in the paper book. The petitioners have rejected the claim of the respondent mainly for the reason that the name and birth of the respondent have not been declared either by the deceased soldier Chathukutty or by his wife during their lifetime. According to the petitioners, all the service records of late K. Chathukutty were destroyed by following the procedure and hence no documents are available to verify the entitlement of the respondent to claim the family pension of deceased Chathukutty.

6. Admittedly, the Sepoy K.Chathukutty was discharged from the Indian Army in the year 1944, whereas the respondent was born only on 12.03.1946. Therefore, as rightly found by the Tribunal, there was no possibility of including her name in the service records of Chathukutty till his discharge from service. From Annexure A3 records of disbursement showing payment of Children’s allowance to the respondent and Annexure A15, a true copy of certificate dated 19.04.2018 issued by the Sub Treasury Officer of Thalassery, it is evident that the respondent was given Children’s allowance from 10.08.1962 to 31.12.2004 in her capacity as the daughter of the deceased K. Chathukutty. No explanation is offered by the petitioners for these documents. In such circumstances, the Tribunal is justified in reaching a finding that the respondent is the daughter of Ex-Sepoy K.

Chathukutty.

7. As far as the contention of belated claim raised by the peti