This order dismissed a writ petition challenging the rejection of a family pension claim. The court upheld the District Magistrate's finding that the petitioner's wife Rehana Bi is alive and documented, denying the claim for a deceased wife, Smt. Rasheeda Khatoon.
Writ petition dismissed; claim for family pension rejected.
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. - 5
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 18403 of 2019
Petitioner :- Faizan Ali Khan Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Azim Ahmad Kazmi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Amit Shukla
Hon'ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani,J.
Heard Sri Azim Ahmad Kazmi, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned standing counsel for the State-respondents and Sri Amit Shukla, learned counsel for the respondent No.2.
By the impugned order dated 17.08.2019, the representation of the petitioner claiming family pension on account of death of his alleged wife Smt. Rasheeda Khatoon, has been rejected. In the impugned order dated 17.08.2019, the District Magistrate, Pilibhit has recorded a finding of fact that as per service record of the petitioner himself, his wife is Smt. Rehana Bi. In the service record of the deceased Rasheeda Khatoon, name of husband is not written rather name of his father Hafeez Sheikh Mohmmad, is recorded. After considering documentary evidences on record, the District Magistrate, Pilibhit came to the conclusion that the petitioner is not widower and his wife Smt. Rehana Bi is alive and therefore, he is not entitled for family pension. The finding so recorded by the District Magistrate, Pilibhit is a finding of fact based on consideration of relevant evidences on record. Therefore, I do not find any good reason to interfere with the impugned order. Consequently, the writ petition is dismissed.
After this order was dictated, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent No.4 has not considered the contention of the petitioner while passing the impugned order. On being asked the learned counsel for the petitioner, whether in service record of the petitioner, the name of his wife is mentioned as Smt. Rehana Bi or not, he could not dispute this fact. Under the circumstances, the finding that Smt. Rehana Bi is the wife of the petitioner and that she is alive, is undisputed. Therefore, the finding recorded in the impugned order does not suffer from any perversity. The writ petition has no merit and is therefore, dismissed .
Order Date :- 29.11.2019 NLY
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to family pension given that service records indicate his wife Rehana Bi is alive and deceased wife Rasheeda Khatoon is unknown to service record.
Whether the finding of fact recorded by the District Magistrate that the petitioner is not widower is perversely against evidence.
Faizan Ali Khan
State Of U.P.
Respondent No.2
Respondent No.3
Respondent No.4
Surya Prakash Kesarwani
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
