VIRMO DEVI Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE husband of the petitioner was a Constable in Uttarakhand Police and died while performing his duties on 16.12.2002. The petitioner being the widow of the deceased has claimed extraordinary pension for the reasons that the death of her husband took place while on duty in Gadarpur, District Udham Singh Nagar when he was going on his motor -cycle to serve summons to parties, and was killed in a road accident.

(2.) THE petitioner relies upon the amended Uttar Pradesh Police (Extraordinary Pension) (First Amendment) Rules, 1975 whereby under the amended Rule 3, an extraordinary pension is liable to be given to the family of the deceased policeman, if he has died not only while confronting and fighting with dacoit and other armed terrorist, but also when he dies while performing his duties. This aspect has further been elaborated in the Government Order dated 19.08.1988, which was issued by the Principal Secretary, Government of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure No. 9 to the writ petition) which says that if a policeman slips from the vehicle and dies in an accident, his family would be entitled for the extraordinary pension. Even though orders passed in erstwhile State of Uttar Pradesh unless superseded, modified or recalled by the State of Uttarakhand continue to be law under the definition of law under Section 25 of the U.P. Re -organisation Act where a law would include inter alia an order, yet the fact remains that whether this order is a part of the "Extraordinary Pension Scheme" is still not clear.

(3.) THE only opposition of the State Government for denying the extraordinary pension to the petitioner is that though he died while on duty, but he should have obtained prior permission from the authorities to use his private motorcycle, as the correct mode of transport in such matters is a public transport. This contention of the State does prima facie appear to be reasonable. However, what is still to be shown by the petitioner before this Court is whether the provision of law she is relying i.e. Government Order dated 19.08.1988 applicable in this case, as this has not been established clearly, however, since these rules are available with the State Government and purely in the interest of justice and also keeping in view the fact as this Court has been informed at bar by the learned counsel for the petitioner that she has refused to take any pension and has presently not getting any pension even after the death of her husband, therefore, under these circumstance, the Principal Secretary/Secretary (Home), Government of Uttarakhand is hereby directed to look into the matter, considering the urgency and if Rules and the Government Order as shown by the petitioner are applicable in this case, he shall pass appropriate orders. However, in case he declines to grant the extraordinary pension to the petitioner, he shall assign reasons while doing so. The petitioner shall submit the entire copy of this writ petition to the concerned authority, before whom she has to file her representation. In case, representation is moved, the same shall be disposed of, as expeditiously as possible, but definitely within a period of eight weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.