SUKHDEI Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Cases of presumption of death are governed by Sections 107 & 108 of the Evidence Act, 1872. The law provides that if a missing person remains unheard of for seven years, a presumption that he is dead can be raised thereafter in appropriate proceedings before the civil court. There cannot be any evidence about the actual date, time and place of death of a person. In cases where declaration of civil death is sought, the presumption of death can be reckoned from the date when the civil court passes a decree declaring person to be dead.

(2.) The petitioner's husband Sadhu Ram worked as Junior Engineer in the PWD (B&R) Branch at Karnal. On June 24, 1991 Sadhu Ram disappeared never to return home and was not heard or seen. His wife approached Court for a declaration of civil death of her husband in a civil suit filed on Sept. 22, 2004. The Civil Court decreed this suit ex parte on May 19, 2007 declaring Sadhu Ram as civil dead. The petitioner was allowed family pension from the presumptive date w.e.f. June 24, 1998 on expiry of the period of seven years from the date he was last seen. She was also granted financial assistance of Rs. 2.5 lacs from which amount a sum of Rs. 54,438.00 was recovered due from late Sadhu Ram without notice or hearing offered to the widow. These benefits were released on Court intervention in CWP No.11538 of 2008 filed by the petitioner praying for directions to the respondents to release family pension, leave encashment, GPF amount, GIS, Gratuity, ex-gratia grant. There was a prayer for providing employment to the petitioner's son under Compassionate Assistance and Employment to the dependents of Deceased Government Employees Rules, 2005. The petition was allowed on Jan. 12, 2009 and the benefits accruing under the order were released in favour of the petitioner. There was, however, no direction issued qua ex gratia employment.

(3.) In this petition, prayer is for a direction to the department to provide compassionate employment to the petitioner's son under the exgratia scheme notified by the Haryana Compassionate Assistance to the Dependent of Deceased Government Employees' Rules, 2003 as modified by Rules 2005 repealing the 2003 Rules leading finally to promulgation of the Haryana Compassionate Assistance to the Dependents of Deceased Government Employees Rules, 2006 replacing past policies on the subject. The further prayer is for a restraint order against the department not to recover the amount of Rs. 54,438.00 from the hands of petitioner as no inquiry was held against Sadhu Ram when he was alive to establish guilt. Therefore the deduction is illegal.