Bombay High CourtWP/3084/2016dismissedrule discharged

Smt. Amina Firdos @ Noorjahan Bee Wd/O Mohammad Zameer v. The Additional Divsional Railway Manager, Central Railway, Nagpur And Others

2016-06-29Hon'Ble Smt. Justice V.A. Naik,Hon'Ble Mrs. Justice Swapna Joshi2 pages

2906wp3084.16.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO.3084/2016 Smt. Amina Firdos @ Noorjahan Bee wd/o Mohammad Zameer ...Versus...

The Additional Divisional Railway Manager, Central Railway, Divisional Railway Manager's Office, Nagpur Division, Nagpur and others - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - None for the petitioner CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK AND MRS. SWAPNA JOSHI, JJ.

DATE : 29.06.2016 By this writ petition, the petitioner seeks a direction to the respondent no.1- Additional Divisional Railway Manager to release the family pension to the petitioner, as she is the legally wedded wife of late Mohammad Zameer.

Since we were not inclined to grant the prayer made in the writ petition on the basis of the petition and the documents annexed thereto, the Counsel for the petitioner had sought time and we had adjourned the matter for today. We had also found on the previous date of hearing that the Senior Record Officer of the respondents had already informed the petitioner on 16.12.2014, in reference to her petition for grant of family pension, dated 1.11.2015 that she was not entitled to family pension. The office communication, dated 16.12.2014 is not annexed to the writ petition. When asked, the learned Counsel for

2906wp3084.16.odt the petitioner had stated that he would tender the same. However, neither the petitioner is present in the Court today nor is the document placed on record.

In the circumstances of the case, we dismiss the writ petition with no order as to costs.

JUDGE JUDGE Wadkar