LAWS(DLH)-1997-10-25

NARAIN DUTT Vs. JAWAHARLAL NEHRU UNIVERSITY

Decided On October 01, 1997
NARAIN DUTT Appellant
V/S
JAWAHARLAL NEHRU UNIVERSITY Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is employed in the Jawaharlal Nehru University, respondent herein. As an employee of the University, the petitioner has been maintaining various accounts, i.e., Group Insurance, G.P.F. Provident Fund etc. According to the petitioner he had nominated his wife Smt. Hira Devi in all the said accounts. The petitioner wanted to change the nomination by substituting the name of Kumari Champa, his grand-daughter (son's daughter) in place of his wife Smt Hira Devi. The reason given for this is that his wife Hira Devi had been living separately from the petitioner and there was litigation between the two. There was a Court order passed under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure under which an amount of Rs. 250.00 per month was being deducted from his salary by the University and paid to his wife Smt. Hira Devi as maintenance. The petitioner has stated that Smt. Hira Devu is not maintaining any relations with the petitioner for a long time and is residing in a village in district Nainital, U.P. It is further the case of the petitioner that his only son has also separated from him and is not maintaining any relationship with the petitioner. The wife and daughter of his only son are said to be staying with the petitioner and the petitioner has to look after them. They are both said to be totally dependent on the petitioner. The petitioner is also said to have executed a Will dated 1st February, 1994 in favour of his grand-daughter Kumari Champa bequeathing all his entitlements and assets in favour of the said Kumari Champa. A copy of the Will has been annexed with the writ petition.

(2.) In view of the above facts, the petitioner applied for changing the nomination in favour of Kumari Champa in place of his wife Smt. Hira Devi. The University authorities did not accede to the request of the petitioner which has ultimately led to the filing of the present writ petition.

(3.) In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the University, the stand of the University is that in view of the relevant rules, the said request of the petitioner could not be acceded to. The relevant rule has been reproduced in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the University and is as under :- (i) Nomination For Death//retirement Gratuity