SHARDA KUMARI W/O LATE SH BAHADUR SINGH, D/O KARAM CHAND AND OTHERS Vs. BHAKRA BEAS MANAGEMENT BOARD AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner's claim in the writ petition is for the release of the pensionary benefits arising out of the death of Bahadur Singh during the employment with the respondents Bhakra Beas Management Board (BBMB). The cause for not releasing any of the entitlements is a suspected involvement of the first petitioner for the death of her husband. It appears that a case had been registered against her for suicide of her husband under Section 306 IPC but a cancellation report had been made. The brother and sister of the deceased husband appear to have approached this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. in Criminal Misc. No. M-4258 of 2011 for ordering a CBI investigation and prosecuting the Ist petitioner for offence under Section 302 IPC. The case is said to be still pending. The counsel appearing on behalf of the BBMB contends that since the petitioner has not been fully cleared of the cause for the death of her husband, it shall not become possible under the rules for release of the benefit to the first petitioner. As far as the claim for the benefits for the petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 who are the minor children, the contention of the respondents is that the rules require the heirship certificate to be verified and when the petitioner's request for issuance of such a certificate was made in January, 2011 they had forwarded the request to the Deputy Commissioner at Hoshiarpur but the same has not been issued. Since there is a case registered against the petitioner for her alleged involvement in causing the death of her husband, it shall not be possible for any authority to treat her as a legal heir since by the provisions of the Indian Succession Act, a heir will be disinherited if he or she is cause for the death of the person whose estate the person seeks for inheritance. I would, therefore, take the situation to be one where the relief can not be given to the Ist petitioner at this stage. As regards the claim on behalf of the petitioners 2 and 3 who are the minor children, the BBMB itself has forwarded the request for issuance of a certificate on 18.1.2011 and 18.4.2011 to the Deputy Commissioner, Hoshiarpur. Further, legal heirship certificate itself has no particular legal sanctity except that it is a matter of convention that the authority who is required to make some disbursals assures to itself some proof through local enquiry by revenue officials that the person for whom the claim is made secures authentication that such a person is a heir. The minors cannot protect their own rights otherwise than through the guardian mother and since the mother's claim as a heir has come under a cloud on account of the imputation against her that she was responsible for the death of her husband, I would hold that the children shall be treated as legal heirs in the light of the evidence brought before this Court by production of copies of the birth certificate of the two children. In the copy of the birth certificate of second petitioner, Avantika has been shown as a child born to the first petitioner Sharda and the deceased husband Bahadur Singh son of Bishan Dass. As regards the third petitioner the birth certificate Annexure P-2 shows Tanisha as a child to the first petitioner and her deceased husband. There is, therefore, prima facie evidence of proof that these two children are the legal heirs of the deceased Bahadur Singh. This is in recognition of the fact that petitioners 2 and 3 are minors and they have been dependents on their parents and after the death of the employee of the BBMB, they are dependents on the first petitioner-mother. The order passed by this Court shall be taken as an adequate proof of the heirship of the petitioners 2 and 3 for securing to them the benefits which the respondents' rules provide for. The first petitioner shall renew her claim, after her name is finally cleared of any involvement for causing death of her deceased husband. The respondents shall take appropriate decision and release the funds in the manner provided under the rules for the benefit of the petitioners 2 and 3 within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

(2.) The writ petition is disposed of on the above terms.