RAJWINDER KAUR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who is widow of Sukhpal Singh, pre-deceased son of Jeeva Singh, husband of Gurmail Kaur (respondent No. 3 herein), has filed a writ of mandamus, directing respondents No. 1 and 2 to release the entire pensionary benefits of Jeeva Singh proportionately to her and respondent No. 3. Sukhpal Singh husband of the petitioner was posted in CRPF and allegedly died due to road accident on 27.8.2012. Thereafter, it appears that litigation started between the petitioner and her mother-in-law Gurmail Kaur regarding benefits to be allowed to the legal heirs of deceased Sukhpal Singh. In the meanwhile, Jeeva Singh expired on 5.7.2013. He was working as Assistant Lineman with respondent No. 2 i.e. Punjab State Power Corporation Limited, Patiala. By way of this writ petition, the petitioner claims that though Gurmail Kaur was nominee, but she is also entitled proportionately to the retiral benefits of Jeeva Singh being the widow of Sukhpal Singh, pre-deceased son of Jeeva Singh.

(2.) Respondent No. 2 in the written staement has maintained that Jeeva Singh had made the nomination in favour of his wife, namely, Gurmail Kaur. It was further stated that as per the information supplied by mother-in-law of the petitioner, Sukhpal Singh is stated to have expired on 27.8.2012 in road side accident. However, another son of Gurmail Kaur had filed a criminal complaint under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC against the petitioner and some others, which is pending in the Court of the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Sunam. It was further stated that under Rule 54 of CCS Pension Rules 1972 of the CRPF, the widow is entitled to all the service benefits. However, the Director General, CRPF, New Delhi, has ordered the payment of Rs. 2,50,000/- (Rs. 1,25,000/- each to the mother and father of the deceased) out of the risk fund/central welfare fund of the CRPF. The respondents have maintained that since the widow of the deceased Jeeva Singh was the nominee, therefore, she is entitled to all the pensionary benefits of Jeeva Singh.

(3.) I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned State counsel, the learned counsel for respondent No. 2, the learned counsel for respondent No. 3 and have also carefully gone through the file.