Munishwar Nath Bhandari, J. - (1.) BY this writ petition, a claim is made for family pension. Learned counsel submits that petitioner married to the deceased, who was granted invalid pension on his retirement due to medical reasons. After death of deceased, the petitioner became entitled to receive family pension, however, it was granted to another lady known as Nomeena, r/o State of Assam. The petitioner made a protest against grant of family pension to her, who in fact impersonated herself in the name of the petitioner to claim family pension. The respondent/s directed the petitioner to bring succession certificate, which was obtained by her. The respondent/s yet denied family pension, though they had stopped paying family pension to Nomeena on submission of protest and present writ petition. Nomeena has been impleaded as party respondent/s, yet no reply has been filed despite all efforts to serve her and service was effected by substitute mode. The writ petition accordingly be allowed.
(2.) LEARNED counsel for the respondent/s on the other hand submits that petitioner married to the deceased and is having nine children out of wedlock. The deceased, however, married to Asmi lady also, who claims to be having same name as of the petitioner. The respondent/s conducted enquiry through the respective Superintendent of Police. As per the Superintendent of Police of the area of the petitioner, the petitioner is legally wedded wife of the deceased having 9 children. As per the Superintendent of Police of area, in which, the respondent No. 3 is residing in Assam is also certified to be wife of deceased having two children. The respondent/s initially took a decision to pay family pension in equal share to the petitioner as well as the respondent No. 3. They later on stopped paying the amount since the year 1985 The petitioner was asked to get succession certificate, which was obtained but it was without impleading Nomeena/Bhagwani Devi as a party respondent/s, thus in absence of proper succession certificate, family pension has not been given to the petitioner. I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel and find that petitioner married to the deceased and she is the first wife of the deceased having 9 children as per the statement of the respondent/s. The deceased solemnized second marriage with lady in Asam, who is said to be in the name of Nomeena and impersonated in the name of petitioner, i.e., Bhagwani Devi. As per the report of Assam Police, it becomes a case of second marriage by the deceased. The petitioner was asked to receive succession certificate, which has been obtained by the Court. The certificate was then produced before the respondent/s yet she has not been extended benefit of family pension, moreso when, now Nomeena (Asmi lady) is not contesting the matter and even no document has been produced by the respondent/s to show her continuous claim like the petitioner.
(3.) IN view of above, there seems no justification on the part of the respondent/s to deny family pension to the petitioner, moreso when, she has already obtained succession certificate and produced it with the respondent/s. The respondents are not having authority to question to succession certificate for want of party, however, it seems that under some ill -advise, they did not endorse the succession certification. In my opinion, succession certificate issued by the Court has to be endorsed unless reversed.;