R.L. Anand, J. - (1.) Smt. Sateshwari is the widow of Late Shri Harisharan and she has filed the present writ petition under Articles 226/227 on the Constitution of India. Rather it has been prayed by the petitioner that a writ of mandamus be issued in her favour directing the respondents to release the benefit of family pension to her with effect from 28.1.1990 on the basis of the scheme formulated by the Government of India.
(2.) The brief facts of the case can be summarised in the following manner. The husband of the petitioner joined the army service on 25.11.1940. He served up to 10.12.1941 when he was boarded out from the service on account of disability. The husband of the petitioner was given the benefit of disability pension up to 4.11.1951 and with effect from 5.11.1951 the benefit of disability pension to the husband of the petitioner was discontinued and there is no proof on record to show that after 4.11.1951 the benefit of disability pension was ever granted to the husband of the petitioner. It is also the common case of the parties that the husband of the petitioner died in the year 1990. The case of the petitioner is that by virtue of the instructions 51 of 80 she is entitled to the benefit of family pension because her husband was entitled to the benefit of service element on the date of the enforcement of the scheme. Therefore, he will be considered a pensioner for all intents and purposes and specially in view of the instructions 51 of 80 Annexure R -1. 2. On the contrary the stand of the respondents is that since the husband of the petitioner was not a pensioner on the date of the enforcement of the scheme, therefore, he is not entitled to the benefit of the scheme Annexure R -l.
(3.) I have heard Shri B.S. Sehgal, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Shri Kamal Sehgal, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents and with their assistance have gone through the record of the case.;