The Court rejected a writ petition challenging the denial of dependent family pension to the appellant. The court held that as the petitioner married the deceased Freedom Fighter after his pension was granted in 1974, the claim was barred by the scheme guidelines, and dismissed the petition.
The writ petition is dismissed for lack of merit.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 29
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 24241 of 2018
Petitioner :- Roshni Respondent :- Union Of India And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Sunil Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Respondent :- A.S.G.I.,Arun Kumar Upadhyay
Hon'ble Pankaj Mithal,J. Hon'ble Saral Srivastava,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Arun Kumar Upadhyay, learned counsel appearing for Union of India.
Petitioner has preferred this petition so as to challenge the order dated 08.03.2018 passed by the Under Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs.
The Under Secretary by the said order has rejected the claim of the petitioner for pension as Dependent of a Freedom Fighter. The ground for rejecting the claim is that the petitioner had married the Freedom Fighter after the grant of pension to him in the year 1974.
There is no dispute to the fact that the revised policy guidelines of Swatantrata Sainik Samman Pension Scheme, 1980, vide paragraph 5 provides that if the Freedom Fighter marries after the sanction of the pension, then family pension to such spouse shall not be admissible.
It is not disputed that the husband of the petitioner late Karam Singh who was a Freedom Fighter was granted pension in the year 1974. The petitioner had married him after grant of the aforesaid pension and her marriage was registered on 13.11.1995. The petitioner has brought on record the certificate of marriage and it does not mention any other date of the marriage of the petitioner.
In view of the above, as the marriage of the petitioner with the deceased Freedom Fighter was registered on 13.11.1995 after he was sanctioned the pension under the Scheme of 1980, the petitioner is not entitle to any pension in view of the condition jof paragraph 5 of the revised scheme.
In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, we find no error or illegality in the order dated 08.03.2018. The petition, as such, lacks merit and is dismissed .
Order Date :- 4.9.2018 Nirmal
1 issue framed by the court
Whether family pension is admissible to a spouse who married the Freedom Fighter after the grant of his pension under the Swatantrata Sainik Samman Pension Scheme, 1980.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Roshni
Union Of India
Pankaj Mithal
Saral Srivastava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
