SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 70730

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
LINIMOL K – Appellant
Versus
THE UNION OF INDIA – Respondent
WP(C) 32831/2023



C.R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D. K. SINGH WEDNESDAY, THE 5 TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2025 / 16TH MAGHA, 1946 WP(C) NO. 32831 OF 2023 PETITIONER/S:

LINIMOL K AGED 37 YEARS W/O LATE ANIL A MANKEELTHEKKATHIL KARTHIKAPPALLY P.O CHINGOLI, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN - 690516 BY ADVS.

S.SHANAVAS KHAN S.INDU KALA G.NAMBIAR RESPONDENT/S:

1 THE UNION OF INDIA MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS NDCC- II, BUILDING JAI SINGH ROAD NEAR JANTAR MANTAR NEW DELHI REPRESENTED BY HOME SECRETARY, PIN - 110001

2 THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OFFICE OF THE DIRECTORATE GENERAL CENTRAL RESERVE POLICE FORCE (C.R.P.F) KENDRIYA KARYALAY PARISAR LODHI ROAD NEW DELHI, PIN - 110003

3 THE PAY AND ACCOUNTS OFFICER CENTRAL PENSION ACCOUNTING OFFICE MINISTRY OF FINANCE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA TRIKOOT II COMPLEX, BHIKAJI CAMA PLACE NEW DELHI, PIN - 110066

4 THE COMMANDANT OFFICE OF THE COMMANDANT-85 BN NAIMED CAMP BIJAPUR CHATTISGARH, PIN - 494444

5 DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE GROUP CENTRE CRPF, RANGAREDDY TELANGANA, PIN - 500078

6 ADDLR6.THE SENIOR ACCOUNTS OFFICER(PENSION)

PAY AND ACCOUNTS OFFICE, CRPF, MHA, SECTOR-23, NEW DELHI -

110085; IS IMPLEADED AS ADDL.R6 AS PER THE ORDER DATED

08.02.2024 IN I.A.2/2024.

BY ADV N.S.DAYA SINDHU SHREE HARI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON

05.02.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT The petitioner is the wife of the deceased Anil A, who was employed as Constable General duty in the 85th Battalion (Bn) of Central Reserve Police Force (CPRF)deployed at Naxal infested area in Bijapur, Chhattisgarh

2.The late Anil A, was selected in the year 2004. While posted at Bijapur, he died on 24.03.2016 as he fell into a water tank and drowned. The petitioner was granted a family pension at the enhanced rate of Rs.15,700/- per month for the period from 25/03/2016 to 24/03/2026, and thereafter, at normal rate of Rs.9,420/- from 25.03.2026 till her date of death or remarriage, whichever is earlier vide the order dated 27.07.2017 issued by the 3rd respondent, the Pay and Accounts Officer Central Pension Accounting Office, Ministry of Finance, Government of India.

3.The petitioner was also given Ex-gratia compensation of Rs. 10 lakhs and Rs.8 Lakhs as Risk Fund Final Payment and Rs. 2,50,000/- each to the parents of the deceased vide the order dated 17.09.2016. Besides the aforesaid amounts, the petitioner and her mother-in-law were given gratuity of Rs.6,22,952/-.

4. As the Husband of the petitioner died in the course of official duty, the petitioner had applied for a grant of extraordinary family pension as provided in terms of Central Civil Service (Extraordinary Pension) Rules, 1972 which are applicable to the personnel of CRPF. The petitioner’s claim for Extraordinary Family Pension has been rejected on the grounds that, as per the Court Of Inquiry (COI), the petitioner’s husband drowned in the water pond during the Holi celebration as he was in inebriated condition.

5.The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner’s husband’s cause of death, as mentioned in the Postmortem report, ‘is Asphyxia due to partial drowning’. There is nothing in the report that liquor or some intoxicant was found in the body of the petitioner’s husband during the postmortem report. It is not clear how the PAO could come to the conclusion that the petitioner’s husband was in an inebriated condition. It is submitted that the petitioner’s husband died while on duty, and therefore, the petitioner is entitled to Extraordinary Family Pension as per the CCS (Extraordinary Pension) Rules.

6.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the rules providing for extraordinary family pension should be given a liberal interpretation inasmuch as the rules are welfare provisions, and are intended to support the families of personnel who perform difficult jobs in very hostile and adverse conditions.

7.The learned counsel for the petitioner h

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top