RACHNA PHULERA Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Through the instant writ petition, the petitioners claim family pension. We are satisfied, that the petitioners have an efficacious alternative remedy under the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985. The husband of petitioner No. 1, on whose account the petitioners are claiming family pension, was a member of the Indian Forest Service. Jurisdiction in respect of claims, arising out of the employment of the husband of petitioner No. 1, lie before the Central Administrative Tribunal in terms of Section 14 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, which is being extracted hereunder:

(2.) In order to fully appreciate the effect of Section 14 (extracted hereinabove) reference must necessarily be made also to Section 3 (q) of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, which defines the term `service matters'. Section 3 (q) is accordingly being extracted hereunder:

(3.) Since the petitioners have an efficacious alternative remedy, we consider it just and appropriate to relegate the petitioners to their aforesaid remedy under the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985.