The Punjab and Haryana High Court recently comprising of a bench of Justice Harsimran Singh Sethi while allowing a petition for the grant of family pension observed that entitlement for the grant of family pension to the dependent parents needs to be seen after the widow or the children loose their eligibility for the grant of the said benefit. (Swaran Kaur v. State of Punjab and others)
Facts of the case
Satnam Singh, the petitioner’s son, worked for the Punjab Police. He had a wife. Satnam Singh was killed in a car accident on June 4, 2006. Following this, the government determined that his widow was eligible for a family pension under the rules.
According to the rules, if a widow remarries, she will lose her right to a family pension. Satnam Singh’s widow remarried on December 2, 2008, and she has been living with her second husband since then. The petitioner was left alone in the family after 2008 and applied for a family pension, but the government denied the claim.
The petitioner was informed that because the widow had already received the family pension, the petitioner’s claim could no longer be accepted. The women following this, approached the High Court for a family pension.
Contention of the Parties
Learned State counsel submitted that as in the present case, the widow of deceased-Satnam Singh was granted the benefit of family pension from the year 2006 to 2008, but after she got re-married, the family pension was stopped, hence keeping in view the terms and conditions of this case, the petitioner cannot be treated to be eligible for the grant of the family pension keeping in view the rules governing the service of the deceased.
Court's observations and Judgment
The bench observed that family pension was to be allowed to the dependant to mitigate the family’s financial hardships. The rules governing the service of the employee were to be adhered to while examining the eligibility/entitlement of the family left behind.
The bench observed that a bare perusal of the rules showed that initially the widow was entitled to family pension, in exclusion to the others, including the children of the deceased employee. She became disentitled in case she remarried. Thereafter, the children became entitled up to a certain age.
The bench further observed that the interpretation being extended to the rule was that the parents were entitled to grant of family pension in case the benefit had not already been extended at any point of time either to the widow or the children. The parents’ entitlement was to be seen immediately after the employee’s death and not thereafter.
The bench remarked, "In the present case, the mother of the deceased is claiming for the grant of family pension. It is further a conceded position that as of now, nobody else other than the mother, who was dependent upon the deceased, is alive and she happens to be the lone claimant of the family pension of deceased-Satnam Singh. That being so, the prayer/claim of the widowed mother, who does not have any source of income, for the grant of family pension, cannot be denied. After the widow of the deceased-Satnam Singh got re-married in December, 2008, petitioner is the lone claimant of the family pension and under rules, parents are entitled for family pension.
Correct interpretation of the rule is that parents cannot be granted the family pension to the exclusion of the widow or the children of the deceased employee. The rule governing the service of the deceased regarding the grant of family pension is being interpreted in an unsustainable manner by the respondent."
The bench allowing the petition remarked, "Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of this case, the widowed mother, who is the only claimant of the family pension after the widow of the deceased got re-married in December, 2008, is held entitled for the grant of family pension from the said date, i.e. from December, 2008.
Let the computation of the family pension to be extended and the respective arrears be released to the petitioner from the date the widow of deceased-Satnam Singh re-married within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order"
Read Order @Latestlaws.com
Picture Source :