Court docket depends on judgments handed beforehand by the Punjab and Haryana HC, and Calcutta HC

Court docket depends on judgments handed beforehand by the Punjab and Haryana HC, and Calcutta HC

The Delhi Excessive Court docket has reiterated that the widowed daughter of a late freedom fighter is entitled to the advantage of the Swatantrata Sainik Samman Pension Scheme (SSSPS) as a dependent.

Justice V. Kameswar Rao relied on a judgment handed by the Punjab and Haryana Excessive Court docket in addition to the Calcutta Excessive Court docket on the topic, whereas granting reduction to a girl, the only real dependent widow daughter of a freedom fighter.

Ms. Kolli Indira Kumari had approached the Excessive Court docket after her software to switch her father’s freedom fighter pension, granted below the SSSPS, to her, after her father’s loss of life, was declined by the federal government.

Ms. Kumari said that, in 1972, the Authorities of India, on the twenty fifth anniversary of Independence, had framed a Central scheme for the grant of pension to freedom fighters and their households from Central income. The scheme commenced from August 15, 1972 and supplied for the grant of pension to dwelling freedom fighters and their households, and if the liberty fighters are not any extra alive, to the households of the martyrs.

The good thing about the mentioned scheme was prolonged with impact from August 1, 1980 to all freedom fighters as a token of
samman (honour) to them below the SSSPS.

Ms. Kumari mentioned her father was granted the advantages of the scheme. He died on November 1, 2019 forsaking his widowed daughter, Ms. Kumari, who’s bodily handicapped, mentally challenged, unemployed, and in addition bedridden.

The plea mentioned Ms. Kumari’s husband died on October 26, 2000 after which she was totally dependent upon her late father. After the loss of life of her father, Ms. Kumari filed an software on November 11, 2019 with all essential paperwork for disbursal of pension to her.

Nevertheless, on February 12, 2020, the Central authorities despatched a communication to her rejecting her request on the idea of revised coverage tips, which states {that a} widowed or divorced daughter isn’t eligible for pension.

Justice Rao remarked that the difficulty isn’t any extra
res integra (factors of the legislation which haven’t been determined) in view of the conclusion of the Punjab and Haryana Excessive Court docket within the case of Khazani Devi
Vs. Union of India selected July 29, 2016. The Punjab and Haryana Excessive Court docket was of the view that the underlying object within the clause of the scheme itemizing eligible dependents is that just one particular person be granted the pension.

“Due to this fact, the authorities must construe the admissibility of profit from that angle. It isn’t the case that daughters are excluded altogether. An single daughter finds point out within the listing of eligible dependents. It will, thus, be a travesty to exclude a divorced daughter,” Justice Rao mentioned.

The Excessive Court docket reiterated the statement made by the Punjab and Haryana Excessive Court docket that, “A useful Scheme such because the one in hand shouldn’t be fettered or constructed by a rigorous interpretation which tends to deprive the claimants of the profit to end in digital frustration or negation of the laudable motive of the Scheme itself.”

The Calcutta Excessive Court docket too had concurred with the views of the Punjab and Haryana Excessive Court docket whereas listening to the same plea.

Justice Rao has directed the Centre to think about the case of Ms. Kumari for grant of dependent pension below the scheme inside eight weeks.

Supply hyperlink