1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR. O R D E R S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION No.155/2002. : : Smt. Resham Vs. Union of India & Ors. : : Date of Order : 30.3.2009 HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Mr. Rajesh Moondia for the petitioner. Mr. Kunal Rawat for the respondents. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner claiming family pension on the ground that her late husband serving the respondents as Sephoy was discharged on medical grounds on 8.4.1954. Copy of the service book of late husband of the petitioner is produced on record. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner made number of representations and lastly she was informed on 22.6.1981 that record relating to service of late husband of the petitioner has already been destroyed. Thereafter again when she represented she received a letter 2 dated 30.6.1989 informing again that the relevant record has already been destroyed and that the petitioner could not get pension. Such information was also given to the petitioner in subsequent letter dated 9.9.1995. It is thereafter that petitioner served a legal notice on 12.6.1999 and filed the present writ petition. 4. The respondents in reply to the writ petition have submitted that late husband of the petitioner was discharged from service w.e.f. 8.4.1954 being medically unfit. He had merely rendered service of 3 years, 2 months and 28 days. As per Para 594 of Regulations of Army, 1987, the records relating to his service were destroyed and necessary particulars were maintained in the long roll by the records of Rajput Regiment. He did not complete requisite minimum period of 15 years for grant of pension. Since he was not recipient of pension, the petitioner could not be awarded family pension. It is contended that her late husband Shri Shree Ram nominated his mother Smt. Sumer as his nominee for receiving family pension at the time of joining service and that petitioner was never nominated. 3 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record, I find that late husband of petitioner was discharged on 8.4.1954 and she filed writ petition belatedly on 20.12.2001 after 47 years would be enormously time barred. The respondents are justified in contending that the records have been destroyed. They are not in position to properly explain as to for what reason he was discharged and whether such discharge was owing to disability aggravated by condition of service. In the facts and circumstances of the case, this writ petition is liable to be dismissed for delay and latches and it is accordingly dismissed. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ)J. A.Arora/- Item No.18.