VAISHNU DEVI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner is mother of late Sepoy Tilak Raj Sharma of 39th Battalion CRPF, who attained martyrdom on 29/6/2010, while fighting with Naxalites in District Narainpur of State of Chhattisgarh. She seeks indulgence of this Court to direct respondents 1 to 6 to pay only half of the total amount being given to respondent No. 7, the wife of martyr Sepoy Tilak Raj Sharma on the ground that she is sole nominee appointed by the deceased. She prays for payment of rest half of the said amount to her being mother and Class-1 legal heir of the deceased under Hindu Succession act, 1956. Petitioner has also prayed for a direction to respondent No. 7 to pay one half of the total amount so far received by her being widow and nominee of Late Tilak Raj Sharma. Respondent No. 9 and 10 are State Bank of India Branches Ban Talab and Billawar in District Kathua, where the benefits payable on account of martyrdom of Shri Tilak Raj have been deposited and where the respondent No. 7 is maintaining her account.

(2.) Briefly stated, the facts projected in the writ petition are that the petitioner is proud mother of Shaheed Tilak Raj, a Sepoy of 39th BN CRPF who sacrificed his life in an encounter with Naxalite terrorists in the State of Chhattisgarh while as respondent No. 7 is the widow of the martyr. On account of martyrdom of Shri Tilak Raj in the line of duty, the official respondents have released a handsome amount which is given by the Government to the heirs of the deceased so that they are in a position to tide over the financial crisis befallen on the family due to untimely demise of their bread winner. The respondent No. 7 is entered as sole nominee of the deceased in his service records and, therefore, all the amounts so given by the Government are pouring in the account of respondent No. 7 maintained with respondent No. 9 and 10. It is submitted that in law a nominee is only entitled to collect/receive such money and the same is required to be disbursed to the legal heirs entitled to receive such money as per their share. It is alleged by the petitioner that after she lost her young son to the terrorists, she also lost her daughter-in-law, who, after receiving huge amount of money given by the Government, left her matrimonial home and started living with her parents leaving the petitioner and her husband to fend for themselves. It has also come on record that respondent No. 7 has remarried. In short, the grievance projected in the petition is that though respondent No. 7 may be entitled to family pension till her death or remarriage, whichever is earlier, as provided under relevant rules yet the other amounts like ex gratia amount payable on account of martyrdom of Tilak Raj is required to be distributed amongst the legal heirs strictly as per Hindu Succession Act. The petitioner being Class 1 heir is entitled to receive equal share in the estate of the deceased along with wife of the deceased.

(3.) It is in the backdrop of aforesaid contentions, the petitioner claims half share in the family pension as well as other sums received or receivable on account of martyrdom of her son Sepoy Tilak Raj.