Friday, 08, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

5Th June vs State Of Uttarakhand & Others
2025 Latest Caselaw 552 UK

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 552 UK
Judgement Date : 5 June, 2025

Uttarakhand High Court

5Th June vs State Of Uttarakhand & Others on 5 June, 2025

                                                        2025:UHC:4575-DB



     IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
                  AT NAINITAL


            HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI G. NARENDAR
                                 AND
                 HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK MAHRA



               WRIT PETITION (S/B) NO. 16 OF 2025



                              05TH JUNE, 2025


Neema Devi                                      ......          Petitioner


Versus


State of Uttarakhand & others                   ......         Respondents



Counsel for the petitioner        :       Mr. Prabhakar Narayan and        Mr.
                                          Dheeraj Joshi, learned counsel

Counsel for the respondents       :       Mr.   S.S.  Chaudhary,   learned
                                          Standing Counsel for the State /
                                          respondents



The Court made the following:


JUDGMENT:

(per Hon'ble The Chief Justice Sri G. Narendar)

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and

the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent / State.

2) The case of the petitioner is that she is the wife

of late Rajendra Narayan, r/o Haripur Gangu, Chaufla

Chauraha, Damuadhunga, District Nainital, who was

2025:UHC:4575-DB employed under the first respondent in the Public Works

Department as an Assistant Engineer and demitted office

on reaching the age of superannuation on 31.12.2018.

That retirement benefits were extended to the late

husband, and on 26.06.2024, the late husband

unfortunately left for his heavenly abode leaving behind

the petitioner, married daughter, son and daughter-in-

law. Copy of the death certificate is produced as

Annexure-2. That after the demise of late husband, the

petitioner approached the department for release of family

pension in her favour which is in accordance with the

rules. That her representation was responded to by the

departmental authorities stating that since the name of

the wife has been declared by her late husband as Smt.

Nirmala Devi and she described herself as Smt. Neema

Devi, the pensionary benefits cannot be released in her

favour.

3) It is the case of the petitioner that her name has all

along been Smt. Neema Devi and is also registered as

such in the Aadhaar Card, PAN Card, Family Register,

Bank account passbook etc., copies of which are produced

as Annexure-4. The petitioner sought for rectification of

the name by representation dated 29.08.2024, copy of

which is produced as Annexure-5. That despite the

2025:UHC:4575-DB representation the respondents have not considered the

same nor disposed it off.

4) The learned Standing Counsel for the respondent-

State would reiterate the same. He would submit that the

pension papers were processed in all earnestness and

matter was sent to the third respondent, and that the

third respondent after noticing the difference in the names

has been pleased to return the same. That in view of the

objection raised by the pension authorities the hands of

the first respondent and the second respondent are tied

down.

5) Having heard the counsels, we are of the considered

opinion that the instant petition could be disposed of by

granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the civil

court and seek a relief of declaration to declare her as the

legally wedded wife of late Rajendra Narayan. In the

event such a suit is instituted by the petitioner, the said

suit shall be heard and disposed of within a period of 18

months. We specify the time limit of 12 months in view of

the sensitivity of the issue involved and the impact on the

life of the petitioner. The petitioner is aged 77 years and

the family pension is the source of her livelihood, hence

the direction to the court to consider and dispose of the

suit within the upper limit of 12 months from the date of

2025:UHC:4575-DB filing of the suit. It is made clear the Trial Court shall not

seek any extensions and shall also not grant any

unnecessary adjournments. The parties shall co-operate

for early disposal of the suit.

6) The writ petition stands ordered accordingly.

7) As a sequel thereto, pending application, if any, shall

stand closed.

________________ G. NARENDAR, C.J.

____________ ALOK MAHRA, J.

Dt: 05TH JUNE, 2025 Negi

HIMANS UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=bb3b60774012c1ef1dae20d13 aaf116e73351fdaf6878326386908a7f90 d5757, postalCode=263001,

HU NEGI st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=75BD9D0FB7F4A80990F C51A722A6BC552D470EB4FD2F88DDF 7C18DB2A1524A4D, cn=HIMANSHU NEGI Date: 2025.06.09 12:56:02 +05'30'

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter