VINEY MITTAL, J. - (1.) The defendants State of Punjab and another have approached this Court through the present appeal having remained unsuccessful before the learned first Appellate Court.
(2.) The plaintiff had filed suit for declaration claiming that she was entitled to the grant of family pension and other benefits on account of death of her son who was working as Wireless Operator. The facts which emerge from the record show that Balwinder Singh had died on July 3, 1993, while in service. On that account, the plaintiff claimed her entitlement for family pension. The suit filed by the plaintiff was dismissed by the learned trial Court. The plaintiff took up the matter in appeal. The learned first Appellate Court relied upon two judgments of this Court in the case of Malkit Singh Vs. State of Punjab, 2003 (2) RSJ 515 and Phool Pati Vs. Haryana State Electricity Board and another, 2002 (3) RSJ 769 to hold that since the revised rules had come into force w.e.f. January 1, 1996, therefore, every parent (father or mother) who happens to be alive after January 1, 1996 would be entitled to family pension irrespective of the fact whether the ward had died prior or after January 1, 1996. Consequently, the appeal of the plaintiff was allowed and her suit was decreed.
(3.) Nothing has been shown that the findings recorded by the learned first Appellate Court suffer from any infirmity or are contrary to record. No question of law, much less any substantial question of law, arises in the present appeal dismissed.;