WPMS/1909/2021
2022 Latest Caselaw 821 UK

                Office Notes,
             reports, orders or
SL.           proceedings or
      Date                                      COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No             directions and
             Registrar's order
              with Signatures
                                  WPMS No. 1909 of 2021
                                  Hon'ble Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.

Mr. Diwan Singh Bisht, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. N.S. Pundir, Deputy Advocate General, for the State of Uttarakhand.

Mr. D.C.S. Rawat, Standing Counsel, for the Union of India.

Today, this matter is listed on the application of respondent No.1, to take the counter affidavit filed by the respondent No.1/State on record.

The same would stand allowed.

The counter affidavit is taken on record. With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the matter is taken up for its final determination.

The petitioner is the widow of the martyr, late Mr. Jiwan Singh, who died in an army operation "Rakshak-III" on 6th September, 2001. It is the case of the petitioner that as a consequence of the death of her late husband, he had been later on declared as to be a "battle casualty". Hence, the petitioner, as a widow, has claimed for, that she would be entitled for the payment of ex gratia payment, as it has been made admissible by the Government Order No. 169/XVII- 3/14-09(31)/2014 dated 5th March, 2014.

This question of the retrospective applicability of the G.O., came up for consideration before this Court in a bunch of Writ Petitions, as to whether the ex gratia, which has made payable to the widows of the martyr of the Armed Forces, who had died in an Army Operation, and who have been declared as to be a "battle casualty", whether the benefit of this welfare legislation of payment of ex gratia payment, would be made applicable retrospectively or not.

That issue has been elaborately dealt with by this Court in Writ Petition (M/S) No. 511 of 2021, Jamuna Devi Vs. State of Uttarakhand and others, as decided by the judgment dated 6th August, 2021, and hence, the learned counsel for the parties, are in agreement that principally, this issue stands covered by the said judgment dated 06.08.2021, though, against the principal judgment rendered in WPMS No. 511 of 2011, as decided on 6th August, 2021, the respondents / State has made a statement that they have preferred a Special Appeal, along with delay condonation application, which is still pending consideration, without admission and there operates no interim order.

In that eventuality, the ratio of the judgment dated 6th August, 2021, would still govern the field, as it has been prayed for by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

Hence, this Writ Petition too would stand allowed in terms of the judgment dated 6th August, 2021, as rendered in WPMS No. 511 of 2011.

(Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.) Dated 22.03.2022 Shiv