JASPAL KAUR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this common order, two writ petitions, the details of which have been mentioned in the heading, are being disposed of as both the writ petitions involve the same question of law and identical facts. For the purpose of this order, the facts are being taken from CWP No. 20374 of 2017.

(2.) In the present writ petition, the grievance of the petitioner is that 50% of the family pension has been ceased by the respondents keeping in view the Note (I) below Rule 6.17(4) of the Punjab Civil Services Rules Volume-II and petitioner is only being paid 50% of the total family pension for which she is entitled, which act of the respondent is contrary to the settled principles of law. The prayer of the petitioner is for issuance of a direction to the respondents to release 100% family pension after her step son, namely, Gurvinder Singh became ineligible for the grant of family pension on attaining the maximum age required for the grant of family pension i.e. 25 years along with arrears.

(3.) The facts as stated in the present writ petition are that husband of the petitioner, namely, Sukhbir Singh was working as a Peon in the department of Excise and Taxation. While in service, Sukhbir Singh died on 24.03.2015. Sukhbir Singh's marriage with the petitioner was the second marriage. The first wife of Sukhbir Singh had died after which Sukhbir Singh married petitioner. From the first marriage of Sukhbir Singh, he had a son, namely, Gurvinder Singh. After the death of Sh. Sukhbir Singh, the family pension was bifurcated between the first family of Sh. Sukhbir Singh and the petitioner keeping in view the provisions of Rule 6.17 of the Punjab Civil Services Rules Vol. II.