HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP No.15011 of 2010 Date of Decision: 21.12.2010 **** Chandro Devi . . . . Petitioner VS. Union of India . . . . . Respondent **** CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT **** 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? **** Present: Mr. Kulvir Narwal, Advocate for the petitioner Ms. Ranjana Shahi, Advocate for the respondent ***** SURYA KANT J. (ORAL) {1}. The petitioner is second wife of late Maru Ram who was a “Freedom Fighter”. His first wife, namely, Dharmo Devi was statedly the real sister of the petitioner and was recipient of the ‘family pension’. She having passed away, the petitioner applied for the grant of ‘family pension’ being the widow of late Maru Ram. The non-grant of ‘family pension’ has prompted the petitioner to approach this Court. {2}. The respondent has filed its reply/affidavit and in para 4 thereof, it is averred that “…..the case of the petitioner for transfer of family pension in her name had been examined in the Ministry & the petitioner was requested vide letter dated 14.07.2009 (Annexure R-I) to intimate the name of the Bank/Treasury with CWP No.15011 of 2010.doc - 2 – complete address and Account Number through which Smt. Dharmo Devi was drawing her Central Samman family pension before her death. However, this Ministry has not received any reply from petitioner in this regard.” {3}. Learned counsel for the petitioner, on the other hand, denies the receipt of any such letter. {4}. Be that as it may, the respondents have placed on record copy of the letter dated 14.07.2009 (Annexure R1) vide which certain information is required by them to determine the petitioner’s claim. {5}. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to submit the requisite information to the respondent–Union of India as early as possible and preferably within one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. The respondents are directed to take an appropriate decision for the grant of ‘family pension’ to the petitioner, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of information by the petitioner. {6}. Ordered accordingly. Dasti. 21.12.2010 vishal shonkar (SURYA KANT) JUDGE