SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, J. - (1.) APPELLANT , the widow of deceased soldier NK Mohd. Sabir Hussain, has been wrongfully denied the Special Family Pension on the specious plea that death of her husband was neither attributable to nor aggravated by military service. The case shocks our judicial conscience for the reasons we are setting out hereinafter.
(2.) NAIK Mohd. Sabir Hussain died in an accident with a civilian Maruti Car on 28.6.2002 at 9.15 hrs. while he was going to Sector 'E', Chandimandir. The appellant being his widow was granted benefits, but Special Family Pension was denied in terms of the letter of CCDA(P), Allahabad dated 5.9.2003 on the ground that the death of her husband was neither attributable to nor aggravated by military service which was communicated to the appellant vide letter dated 8.10.2003. The appellant, aggrieved by this order, preferred an appeal, which was also dismissed vide order dated 24.5.2004 of the appellate authority. There is also a second order in appeal dated 9.5.2006 over which there is some lack of clarity but the fact remains that the concerned pension department refused to grant the Special Family Pension. It appears that there was an earlier writ petition filed bearing CWP No.1318 of 2006 whereafter the order dated 9.5.2006 was brought to the notice of the Court and that petition was withdrawn with liberty to assail even that order which had not been assailed earlier. The appellant assailed all these orders in CWP No.14160 of 2007, which was dismissed on 16.3.2009 after having called for the stand of the respondents which was filed by way of a written statement under the signatures of Major B.S. Verma, Senior Record Officer, Record Office, BEG, Kirkee, Pune,.
(3.) THE respondents took the stand that the late husband of the appellant had gone to market to purchase ration for himself and not for the Unit and that was the reason for rejection of the Special Family Pension. In this behalf, we have perused the aforesaid written statement filed on behalf of the respondents where a categorical stand has been taken by referring to the deposition of the first witness in the Court of Enquiry proceedings dated 5.7.2002. However, said enquiry proceedings were never produced for the perusal of the learned single Judge and relying on this stand, the learned single Judge dismissed the writ petition.;