Smt. Durgabay Moti Ram Bolkey vs Union Of India Thru. Its Secy. ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 27013 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:63788-DB
 
Court No. - 1
 

 
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 7462 of 2023
 

 
Petitioner :- Smt. Durgabay Moti Ram Bolkey
 
Respondent :- Union Of India Thru. Its Secy. Ministry Of Defence Govt. Of India, New Delhi And Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Nand Kishore
 
Counsel for Respondent :- A.S.G.I.
 

 
Hon'ble Attau Rahman Masoodi,J.

Hon'ble Om Prakash Shukla,J.

1. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and Shri S.B. Pandey, learned Deputy Soliciter General of India assisted by Shri Varun Pandey, learned counsel for the respondents.

2. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has assailed the order passed by Armed Forces Tribunal, Regional Bench, Lucknow in O.A. No.991 of 2022 filed along with M.A. No.1199 of 2022 whereby the application seeking condonation of delay in filing the O.A. has been dismissed on the ground of heavy latches along with the original application.

3. It is an admitted position before this Court that the husband of the petitioner was not a pensioner till the date of his death in the year 2018. For the grant of family pension, law requires the legal representative to be a dependent of the pensioner. The claim for pension was never laid by the petitioner's husband ever since 1970 who died on 20.08.2018. It is only after the death of the petitioner's husband that some correspondence has been entered into by the petitioner.

4. The relief prayed for before the tribunal was for an order that the opposite party nos.3 and 4 be directed to provide family pension to the petitioner, according to the Central Government letter dated 09.02.1995 read with 28.04.2011.

5. On a perusal of both the letters placed reliance upon, it is gathered that the family pension would be admissible only to the legal heirs of the pensioner. As has been pointed out hereinabove that the husband of the petitioner was not a pensioner nor there was any such claim pending before any competent forum in this regard, therefore, the prayer made by the petitioner being misconceived was rightly rejected on the ground of latches.

6. In this view of the matter, the tribunal treating the O.A. to be heavily time barred, in our considered opinion, does not suffer from any illegality.

7. On a careful consideration of the judgment/ order passed by the Armed Force Tribunal we do not gather any illegality or error calling for an interference in the impugned judgment.

8. Accordingly, the writ petition being bereft of any merit is dismissed.

Order Date :- 4.10.2023

Mohd. Sharif