MANJU MAZUMDAR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. N Dhar, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. H Rahman, learned Asstt. Solicitor General of India, who represents the respondents.

(2.) THE present petition has been filed by the writ petitioner, who is the mother of late Ashim Mazumdar, who was serving as a rifleman in the assam Riffles, a Para-military force under the Central Government. The prayer made in the writ petition is to quash the order dated 29. 7. 1998 (Annexure 11), whereby it is declared that the claim for pensionary benefits are not admissible as the son of the petitioner was declared a deserter and his service stood automatically terminated. Further direction is sought to provide family pensionary dues to the writ petitioner, who is the mother of the deceased rifleman under the Assam Riffles.

(3.) THE rifleman son of the petitioner joined service on 30. 04. 1987 and he was sanctioned leave by the Commandant of 17th Battalion of Assam riffles for 60 days with effect from 23. 7. 1991 to 20. 9. 1991. It is pleaded that just before the rifleman son as to report back for his duty, he fell sick and applications were submitted seeking extension of leave and copies of this applications sent under certificate of post, are enclosed to the writ petition. Further it is averred on behalf of the respondent that the said applications have not been received. Eventually the son of the petitioner was detected to be suffering from tuberculosis and he died of the deceased on 14. 5. 1998, without being able to resume his duties with the Assam Riffles. The petitioner being the mother of the deceased rifleman, informed about the death of her son by communication dated 6. 7. 1998, addressed to the Director general, Assam Riffles (Annexure 10) and requested for payment of all dues which might be available to her deceased son, who served as rifleman in the Assam Riffles. In response to the said communication of the petitioner, the director General of Assam Riffles issued the impugned letter dated 29. 7. 1998, conveying the decision that as the rifleman did not rejoin his duty on expiry of leave and remain absent for more than 5 years, he was declared as a deserter and since he died as a deserter from his force, no pensionary benefits are admissible to a deserter. The claim for family pension made by the petitioner was also rejected by communication dated 24. 3. 1999 (Annexure 15), issued by the assam Riffles Directorate to the petitioner.