← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCWP/19689/2023dismissed

Rajesh Devi v. Union Of India And Others

2023-12-14Mr. Justice Jagmohan Bansal2 pages

CWP-19689-2023 -12023:PHHC:160496

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CWP-19689-2023 Date of Decision : 14.12.2023 Rajesh Devi ......... Petitioner

Versus

Union of India and others ......... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL Present :

Mr.Ved Parkash, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Ramesh Chand Sharma, Sr.Panel Counsel for the respondents.

**** JAGMOHAN BANSAL , J. (Oral) 1.

The petitioner through instant petition under Articles 226/227 of Constitution of India is seeking setting aside of orders dated 30.12.2022 (Annexure P-8) and 07.02.2023 (Annexure P-10) whereby her claim for grant of family pension has been rejected.

2.

The petitioner is claiming herself 2nd wife of Som Dev who was working with respondent and passed away on 27.04.2020. The petitioner is claiming that there was no child from 1st marriage, thus, deceased employee solemnised 2nd marriage with the petitioner. All children of the deceased employee are from the 2nd marriage. The names of the children are duly recorded in the service record of the deceased employee, however, name of the petitioner as wife is not recorded. 3.

Learned counsel for the respondents submits that respondent has no mean to verify whether the petitioner is a duly wedded 2nd wife of Anju Goel 2023.12.14 17:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

CWP-19689-2023 -22023:PHHC:160496 the deceased employee, thus, she cannot be extended benefit of family pension. He further submits that in the absence of order passed by Civil Court or marriage certificate issued by the competent authority, the petitioner cannot be considered 2nd wife of the deceased employee. 4.

Faced with this, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the present petition with liberty to submit marriage certificate or order of Civil Court in support of his contention. 5.

Dismissed as withdrawn with liberty aforesaid. 6.

It is made clear that if petitioner is able to prove her claim, the impugned orders would not come in her way.

( JAGMOHAN BANSAL ) 14.12.2023 JUDGE anju Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No Anju Goel 2023.12.14 17:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh