RATNO DEVI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant appeal under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent is directed against the judgment and order dated 24.05.2013 rendered by the learned Writ Court while dismissing the writ petition filed by the appellant claiming family pension in lieu of the death of her son who died in harness. A short question which emerges for determination is "whether the appellant-Mother or the remarried widow (respon-dent-7) would be entitled to Family Pension". The appellant felt aggrieved because official respondents passed an order dated 27.02.2006 awarding family pension to the remarried widow Sneh Lata-respondent No. 7. The appellant had a son, namely, Ramesh Lal, who was employed in Border Security Force. He was serving in 73 Battalion of the Border Security Force (No. 99121625) and died in harness on 27.09.2005. He was survived by the appellant-his mother and respondent No. 7-his widow. The family pension was released by official respondents to the widow of Ramesh Lal, namely, Smt. Sneh Lata-respondent No. 7.

(2.) The appellant leveled allegation that the widow has re-married after two/three months of the death of her son. The appellant claimed to have performed last rites of her deceased son because the widow-respondent No. 7 left her house and solemnized marriage with one Bunty Kumar who is her nephew. She started living with him as his wife. The appellant sent representation to the B.S.F. Authorities and prayed for grant of family pension to her. According to her, the family pension was illegally granted in favour of the widow-respondent No. 7 which is against provision of the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules 1972 and various other orders issued in that regard.

(3.) Keeping in view the allegation of re-marriage, the Writ Court on 17.04.2010 issued direction to the Additional District Judge (Matrimonial Cases), Jammu to record his finding on the issue as to whether the widow-respondent No. 7 had re-married after the death of her husband, Sh. Ramesh Lal. The Additional District Judge (Matrimonial Cases), Jammu submitted his report on 01.10.2011 opining that she had re-married after the death of her husband with one Mr. Bunty Kumar and they have been living as husband and wife. The claim that Mr. Bunty Kumar is her nephew has also not been rebutted. In other words, it was established that before marriage, the widow-respondent No. 7 was aunt of Mr. Bunty Kumar. However, learned Additional District Judge traversed the area of legality of marriage under Hindu Marriage Act opining that such a marriage cannot be regarded as a valid marriage and therefore, it is void. The operative part of the report would read as under:-