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

HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Smt. Munni Devi – Appellant
Versus
Union of India and Others – Respondent
WP(C)-5369_1998



Pg. 1 of 14

Unreportable

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+WP(C) No.5369/1998

Date of Decision: 23.05.2008

#Smt. Munni Devi

.....Petitioner

Through: Mr. G.K. Sharma

Versus

$Union of India and Others

....Respondents

^

Through Mr.V.P. Singh with

Ms. Shubhra Parashar

CORAM :-

*THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.K.SIKRI

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.M. MALIK

1.Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to

see the Judgment?

2.To be referred to the Reporter or not?

3.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

A.K. SIKRI, J.

:

1.The petitioner, widow of the deceased Madan Lal, has

approached this Court by means of the present petition for

grant of special family pension. Her husband Madan Lal

(hereinafter referred to as the 'deceased') was enrolled in the

Army on 9.7.1985 as a Gunner/OFC. As per the petitioner, the

deceased was hail and hearty when he joined the Army. He

2008:DHC:1741-DB

Pg. 2 of 14

participated in various operations and gave good account of

himself. He even actively participated in games and sports

which are organised by the Army regularly to develop

competitive spirit and/or to ensure their physical fitness.

2.In May 1991, when the deceased was serving in 130 AD

Regiment, a game of Kabaddi was organised in which he was

also one of the players. However, during that game, the

deceased sustained severe injury in his groin. As a result, the

deceased developed severely painful swelling in his right

scrotum. The deceased was given the treatment in the unit

by a General Duty Medical Officer which did not have any

effect and his condition continued to deteriorate. On

5.7.1991, he was admitted to 167 Military Hospital where he

underwent

retrograde

Orchidectony

(Right),

leaving

a

corrugated drain through the scrotum. Still his condition did

not improve. In August 1991, he was transferred to Malignant

Diseases Treatment Centre, Command Hospital, Southern

Command, Pune. After various tests he was diagnosed as

suffering from Embryonal Carcinoma Testis (Right). To put it

simply

his

right

testis

was

diagnosed

as

Cancerous.

Chemotherapy treatment was started which also could not

cure the illness of the deceased as his condition kept on

deteriorating. On 4.5.1992, the deceased was placed on

2008:DHC:1741-DB

Pg. 3 of 14

'Dangerously ill list' and transferred to Army Hospital, Delhi

Cantt. However, as normally happens with such a disease, it

proved mortal and ultimately the husband of the petitioner

breathed his last on 25.5.1992.

3.The deceased left behind his widow (the petitioner herein) and

two small children and an old father. Family pension was

sanctioned to the petitioner which she started getting from

the date of her husband's death and continues to get the

same. The petitioner, however, wanted special family pension

also which is granted to a widow in case her husband dies

while on duty due to injury or ailment, which is either

attributable to the military service or is aggravated by military

service. According to the petitioner, the Commanding Officer,

130 AD Regiment, where the deceased was serving at the

relevant time, submitted necessary documents through

Records Air Defence Regiment recommending grant of special

family pension which was forwarded to the Chief Controller of

Defence Accounts (Pensions), Allahabad (respondent No.4) on

4.2.1993. However, the CCDAP, Allahabad turned down the

claim of the petitioner for special family pension vide

communication dated 29.7.1993 on the ground that the death

of the deceased was neither attributable to military service

nor aggravated by it. Only family pension was sanctioned. For

2008:DHC:1741-DB

Pg. 4 of 14

two years the petitioner kept on corresponding with the

authorities for grant of special family pension. Various

reminders including Advocate's notice was sent in this behalf.

The petitioner als

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