[2025:RJ-JD:47972]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12368/2016 Smt. Saroj Kanwar W/o Late Shree A.s.i. Raju Singh, R/o Village And Post Bera, Tehsil-Bali, District-Pali, Raj.

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan Through, The Secretary To The Government Department Of Home Affairs, Jaipur.

2. The Director, Directorate Of Pension And Pensiobners Welfare, Rajasthan, Jaipur

3. Superintendent Of Police, Pali.

----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mahaveer Singh For Respondent(s) : Mr. Raj Singh Bhati Mr. Rituraj Singh Bhati HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

Order

06/11/2025

1. The present writ petition has been instituted under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, wherein the petitioner seeks issuance of an appropriate writ, order, or direction commanding the respondents to grant her the benefit of Special Pensionary Award under Chapter VII of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1996 (“the Rules of 1996”), consequent upon the demise of her husband, Late Shri Raju Singh, Assistant Sub-Inspector, who lost his life while discharging official duties.

2. Succinctly stated, the petitioner’s late husband, Shri Raju Singh, was posted as Assistant Sub-Inspector at Police Station Sadar, District Pali, and was widely recognized for his diligence and devotion to duty. On 28.07.2016, while responding to an emergency call regarding a road accident near Ramasiya, he proceeded to the site accompanied by two other police personnel. Tragically, during the course of this official engagement, he met with a fatal accident en route to the hospital and succumbed to his injuries. The incident was duly recorded in the relevant FIR and Rojnamcha Report.

2.1. Despite the petitioner’s applications and successive representations dated 31.08.2016 addressed to the Superintendent of Police, Pali; the Director General of Police; and the Inspector General, Jodhpur Range, her request for grant of Special Pensionary Award was rejected vide order dated 23.09.2016. Instead, she was sanctioned only the regular family pension. Aggrieved thereby, she has preferred the present writ petition.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the case squarely falls within the ambit of Chapter VII of the Rules of 1996, which entitles the family of a government servant who dies while performing official duties to a Special Pensionary Award. It was further urged that the issue stands conclusively settled by a catena of judicial precedents, inter alia: a. Savita Yadav v. State of Rajasthan, D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.1668/1987, wherein the Division Bench struck down the restrictive expression “as a result of enemy action” and held that every government servant who dies in the discharge of duty is entitled to such benefit;

b. Smt. Papu Devi v. State of Rajasthan & Ors., S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.3087/1996, decided on 23.02.2008, reiterating the aforesaid principle;

c. Smt. Paras Kanwar v. State of Rajasthan & Ors., S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.11423/2009, decided on 03.11.2011, where identical relief was granted;

d. State of Rajasthan & Ors. v. Madhubala, Civil Appeal No.489/2018, decided on 20.03.2015, wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court upheld the High Court’s view in Paras Kanwar; and e. Smt. Fatima v. State of Rajasthan & Ors., Civil Writ Petition No.8036/2012, decided on 06.11.2013, wherein the Apex Court reaffirmed the same principle.

Placing reliance on these binding precedents, counsel submitted that the respondents’ rejection of the petitioner’s claim is patently arbitrary, discriminatory, and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution, warranting immediate judicial intervention.

4. Learned counsel for the respondents, while not disputing the factual circumstances surrounding the unfortunate demise of Late Shri Raju Singh, fairly conceded that the issue in question stands covered by the judgments rendered in Smt. Paras Kanwar (supra) and Madhubala (supra), and that the petitioner’s case is on identical footing.

5. I