R.S.A. No.3250 of 2008 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH R.S.A. No.3250 of 2008 (O&M) Date of Decision : 31.3.2009 Tej Kaur ....Appellant Versus Union of India & others ...Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER .... Present : Mr. Ramesh Goyal, Advocate for the appellant. ..... MAHESH GROVER, J. Marginal delay of 21 days in filing the appeal is condoned. The appellant, who is the mother of deceased Hardeep Singh, had prayed for grant of family pension. Both the Courts below have arrived at a conclusion that as per Rule 216 of Pension Regulations of the Army, 1961, which is reproduced as under, the appellant is not entitled to family pension for the reason that the deceased was survived by his widow and two minor children :- “216.The following members of the family of a deceased individual shall be viewed as eligible for the right of a special family pension provided that they are otherwise qualified :- R.S.A. No.3250 of 2008 (O&M) -2- (a) Widow/widower lawfully married. It includes a widow who was married after individuals release/retirement/discharge/invalidment. (b) Son actual and legitimate/including validly adopted. (c) Daughter, actual and legitimate/(including validly adopted). (d) Father (e) Mother (f) Brother (g) Sister” A perusal of the aforesaid rule reveals that the widow and the children have the preferential right of receiving the family pension. In this view of the matter, the findings recorded by the Courts below cannot be termed to be perverse or illegal so as to warrant any interference in the regular second appeal. Apart from this, there is no other controversy which has been dealt with in the case and no other point has been raised before this court. Consequently, the appeal being devoid of any merit is dismissed. 31.3.2009 (MAHESH GROVER) JUDGE dss