TRIPTA DEVI Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The facts of the case leading to the present controversy are that deceased Chander Kant (husband of the petitioner) constable No. 203 GRP Amritsar joined on 21.11.1962 and died during the service on 02.05.1997 after rendering 33 years of qualifying service with the respondent-department. It also comes out that during his lifetime he married twice. First wife of the deceased employee died leaving behind one son namely, Jatinder Pal-respondent No.5. After the death of first wife, he remarried Tripta Devi-petitioner from which he had two daughters namely Seema & Chetna and two sons namely, Rajat Kumar and Naresh Kumar. Jatinder Pal (son of the deceased from first marriage) is now stated to be of 40 years and the other children from second marriage aged between 30-35 years as disclosed in the petition. It comes out that after the death of Chander Kant, the litigation cropped out between the legal heirs of the deceased regarding the retiral benefits. Bhagwati, mother of the deceased as well as Jatinder Pal (son of the deceased from first marriage) filed a civil suit claiming the proportionate share in the provident fund, gratuity, leave encashment, pension etc. The suit was ultimately decreed by learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, Amritsar vide judgment and decree dated 31.10.2001 wherein after discussion the provisions of Rule 6.17 (4) of Punjab Civil Services Rules and the effect of the judgment of the High Court in State of Punjab and another v. Kharak Singh Kang and another, 1998 (4) SLR 594 (DB), it was held as under:

(2.) Now the admitted position is that Bhagwati (mother of the deceased employee) has also died and Jatinder Pal (son of the deceased from first marriage) has crossed the age of 25 years. The petitioner now claimed that she is now entitled to 100% pension. On the other hand, State has taken the stand that on the death of the mother as well as on attaining the age of 25 by Jatinder Pal (son of the deceased from first marriage) their share will cease and will not go to the petitioner. State has placed reliance upon instructions of Government of Punjab (Annexure RA-1) dated 24.10.2006.

(3.) The short question arising for consideration before this Court is as to whether on the death of the mother of the deceased employee and on account of his son from pre-deceased wife attaining the age of 25 years, their share will go to the second wife-widow of the deceased employee? The instruction dated 24.10.2016 (Annexure-RA1) of Government of Punjab, would show that it pertains to the case where the deceased employee is survived by two wives. In that regard Note 1 and 2 of Rule 6.17 (4) of Punjab Civil Services Rules, Vol II are there. In that case, if one of the widow dies and her share shall cease, in the absence of any minor legal heir. However, the position is different here. The mother was not included in the definition of 'family' as one of the family member and it was only on account of the judgment of Kharak Singh Kang (supra) that the parents were also held entitled to pension proportionately. Regarding the share of the son of pre-deceased first wife of the employee when he has attained the age of 25. The law has already been settled by the Hon'ble Division Bench judgments of this Court in LPA No. 1434 of 2014 (O&M), The State of Punjab and others v. Harpal Kaur decided on 01.09.2014 and Ram Dulari v. State of Haryana and others, 2010 (1) SLR 40 In both the cases this Court took the view that when the son of the pre-deceased first wife attain the age of 25 year, his share will go to the surviving widow of the deceased. The Division Bench of this court in Harpal Kaur's case has observed as under: