Writ petition filed seeking direction to defense authorities to consider representations for attaching maintenance to retired ex-serviceman's pension. Court observed that since the ex-serviceman has retired, the issue does not arise for consideration.
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.
: 1 :
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2013
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE H.N.NAGAMOHAN DAS
WRIT PETITION No. 79767/2013 (GM-RES)
BETWEEN :
BOTH THE R/O.C/O. SHIVANAIK ALADMAR, 4TH CROSS ANJANEYA NAGAR KELAGERI DHARWAD DIST. 580 001 KARNATAKA. … PETITIONERS
(BY Sri. T M NADAF, ADV.)
AND :
: 2 :
| 2. | OFFICE OF THE PRINCIPAL CONTROLLER OF DEFENCE ACCOUNTS (PENSIONS) DRAUPADI GHAT ALLAHABAD – 211104. |
|---|---|
| 3. | DIRECTOR WELFARE WELFARE COMPLEX ROOM No. 210, SOUTH BLOCK IHQ OF MOD (ARMY) DHQ PO NEW DELHI – 110 011. |
| 4. | THE COMMANDING OFFICER 514, AD REGIMENT PIN 926514 C/O. 56 APO. |
| 5. | JOINT DIRECTOR DEPT. OF SAINIK WELFARE AND RESETTLEMENT BELGAUM – 590 002 (KARNATAKA). |
| 6. | ADDL. DIRECTOR WELFARE WELFARE COMPLEX ROOM No. 210, SOUTH BLOCK IHQ OF MOD (ARMY) DHQ PO NEW DELHI – 110 011. |
| 7. | OFFICER-IN-CHARGE ARMY AIR DEFENCE RECORDS PIN 908803, C/O. 56 APO. |
| 8. | Sri. MARUTI HANAMANTHA PUJARI, JC 299097-A (OFC) EX-SUB., R/O. MANIKATTI SAUNDATTI TQ., BELGAUM DIST. … RESPONDENTS |
: 3 :
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA WITH A PRAYER TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT Nos. 1 TO 7 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATIONS DATED 15.05.2012, 05.06.2012, 02.08.2012 AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R
Petitioner obtained a decree for maintenance in M.C. No. 12/2000 against respondent No. 8. In execution of the decree the salary of respondent No. 8 was attached and maintenance was deducted as permissible under law. In the year 2012 respondent No. 8 retired from service by taking voluntary retirement. Thereafter respondent Nos. 1 to 7 have stopped deducting the maintenance from the salary of respondent No. 8. Thereafter the petitioner gave certain representations to respondent Nos. 1 to 7 requesting them to deduct the maintenance from the pension payable to respondent No. 8. Since there was no Court order attaching the pension, they have not considered the representations of the petitioner. In the circumstances the petitioner is before this Court for a writ of mandamus directing
: 4 :
respondent Nos.1 to 7 to consider her representations at Annexures C, F, J and N.
petition is hereby disposed off without reference to the respondents.
SD/JUDGE
Lrs.
3 issues framed by the court
Whether respondents should consider petitioner representations to attach maintenance to respondent No. 8's pension.
Whether execution of maintenance decree can proceed given respondent No. 8's retirement.
Whether writ court can direct consideration of representations in absence of court order attaching pension.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Smt. Shashikala Maruthi Pujari
Kumari Kusuma
Union of India
Sri. Maruthi Hanamanta Pujari
H.N. Nagamohan Das
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
