Dismissed

Vaibhav v. Union of India

Uttarakhand HC22 Apr 2022WPSS/96/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition filed for family pension and compassionate appointment. Court found no illegality in respondent requesting succession certificate due to bigamy issues. Petition dismissed. Court directed expeditious disposal of succession certificate application.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed. No order as to costs. Direction to decide succession certificate application expeditiously within eight months.

SL.
No

Date

Office Notes,
reports, orders or
proceedings or
directions and
Registrar’s order
with Signatures

COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS

WPSS No. 96 of 2021
Hon’ble Man oj Ku m ar Tiw ar i, J.

Mr. Sanjay Raturi, Advocate for the
petitioner.

Mr. Ajay Joshi, Advocate holding

brief of Ms. Monika Pant, Standing

Counsel for the Union of India.

Heard
learned
counsel
for
the

parties.

Petitioners
had
claimed
family

pension and other dues of Late Samsher

Singh,
who
died
on
25.06.2019.

Petitioner
no.
1
had
also
claimed

compassionate
appointment.
Joint

General
Manager
Opto
Electronics

Factory,
Dehradun
asked
them
to

produce a succession certificate, vide

letter dated 28.08.2020. In the said

letter, it is stated that Shamsher Singh

was married to one Smt. Krishna Devi in

the year 1981 and his marriage with

petitioner
no.
2
appears
to
be

solemnised
on
12.06.1987,
during

subsistence of the first marriage.

By means of this writ petition,

petitioner has sought the following
relief: - “(I) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quash the impugned order dated 28-08-2020 passed by respondent no. 3 (ANNEXURE-3of writ petition.) (II) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to release all thepending dues/ funds benefits to the petitionerson account of sudden death of deceased employee with appropriate rate on interest. (III) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to forthwith release the family pension to the petitioners. (IV) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing respondent no. 1 to take necessary action against the respondent no. 3 for the wrongs / acts and omissions deliberately committee by him against the petitioners.”
It is well known that any marriage
solemnised during subsistence of earlier
marriage is void. Petitioner no. 2 would
be treated as legally wedded wife of Late
Samsher Singh when she is able to prove
that on the date of her marriage, earlier
marriage of Shamsher Singh was not
subsisting.
The impugned letter reveals that
Shamsher Singh had two daughters from
Smt. Krishna Devi. Children born out of
previous marriage cannot be denied

petitioner
has
sought
the
following

relief: -
“(I)
Issue a writ order or direction in the
nature
of
certiorari
to
quash
the
impugned order dated 28-08-2020 passed
by respondent no. 3 (ANNEXURE-3of
writ petition.)
(II)
Issue a writ order or direction in the
nature of mandamus commanding the
respondents to release all thepending
dues/ funds benefits to the petitionerson
account of sudden death of deceased
employee
with
appropriate
rate
on
interest.
(III) Issue a writ order or direction in the
nature of mandamus commanding the
respondents
to
forthwith
release
the
family pension to the petitioners.
(IV) Issue a writ order or direction in the
nature of mandamus directing respondent
no. 1 to take necessary action against the
respondent no. 3 for the wrongs / acts and
omissions deliberately committee by him
against the petitioners.”

It is well known that any marriage

solemnised during subsistence of earlier

marriage is void. Petitioner no. 2 would

be treated as legally wedded wife of Late

Samsher Singh when she is able to prove

that on the date of her marriage, earlier

marriage of Shamsher Singh was not

subsisting.

The impugned letter reveals that

Shamsher Singh had two daughters from

Smt. Krishna Devi. Children born out of

previous marriage cannot be denied

what is legally due to them.
In such view of the matter, this
Court does not find any illegality in the
impugned letter. Thus, there is no scope
for interference with the impugned
letter. For the aforesaid reason, the
other reliefs, as claimed, also cannot be granted to petitioners. Accordingly, writ petition fails and is
dismissed. No order as to costs.
However, if petitioners file
application for succession certificate, the Court concerned shall make endeavour
to decide the same expeditiously,
preferably within eight months from date of filing of such application. ( Man oj Ku m ar Tiw ar i, J.) 22.04.2022 Shubham

what is legally due to them.

In such view of the matter, this

Court does not find any illegality in the

impugned letter. Thus, there is no scope

for
interference
with
the
impugned

letter. For the aforesaid reason, the

other reliefs, as claimed, also cannot be
granted to petitioners.
Accordingly, writ petition fails and is

dismissed.
No
order
as
to
costs.

However,
if
petitioners
file

application for succession certificate, the
Court concerned shall make endeavour

to
decide
the
same
expeditiously,

preferably within eight months from date
of filing of such application.

( Man oj Ku m ar Tiw ar i, J.)
22.04.2022
Shubham

Vaibhav v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vaibhav v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kausar Vs State of Uttarakhand

Avani (Minor) Vs State Bank of India

Smt Nafeesa Begum Vs North Eastern Railway and Others

Hurshpreet Hp Kaur Vs State of Uttarakhand

Bonisha Vs State of Uttarakhand

Swati Singh Vs State of Uttarakhand