MAYA DEVI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner Maya Devi is the wife of late Naik Lal Singh, who was enrolled in the Army on 8th October, 1965. He was subjected to prescribed medical and physical test before his enrollment in the Army by the Competent Medical Authority. He was granted service No. 6361304. He was granted casual leave with effect from 10.08.1981 to 11.08.1981 with permission to prefix 09.08.1981 being Sunday. The husband of the petitioner proceeded for journey on 9th August, 1981 with permission to leave the station. The bus in which the husband of the petitioner was travelling met with an accident. Unfortunately, husband of the petitioner died in that accident. The respondents granted ordinary family pension to the petitioner. According to the petitioner, she was entitled for special family pension. On 21st October, 1982, the claim of the petitioner for grant of special family pension was rejected by PCDA(P) Allahabad by saying that the cause of death of the husband of the petitioner was not attributable to military service. Against this order, the petitioner preferred an appeal on 8th November, 2004 by giving complete facts. However, this appeal was also rejected by the Records Office on 9th December, 2004, Annexure P-1 to the writ petition. The petitioner still preferred another appeal to the Ministry of Defence wherein she referred the judgment of this Court in the case of Banso Devi v. UOI (LPA No. 226/2001 decided on 24.9.2001) 2002 (1) F.L.J. 582 wherein the Delhi High Court vide its order dated 24th September, 2001 had granted special family pension to the wife of the deceased in similar circumstances. However, this request of the petitioner was not acceded to, which resulted in filing of the present writ petition.

(2.) The contention on behalf of the petitioner is that in terms of Rule 12 (d) of the Entitlement Rules for Casualty Pensionary Awards, 1982, a person, who is on casual leave, is to be treated on duty and the death of the husband of the petitioner while on casual leave would tantamount to death while on duty, thus, attributable to military service. Reliance is also placed on Regulation 213 of the Pension Regulations for the Army 1961 (Part-I), which reads as under:-

(3.) Rule 10 of the Leave Rules for Army deals with the matter of casual leave and spells out that a person, who is on casual leave, would be on duty. The said rule reads as under:-