IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI TUESDAY, THE 4TH MARCH 2008 / 14TH PHALGUNA 1929 WP(C).No. 32883 of 2006(M) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ LAKSHMIKUTTY M.C., D/O. LATE P.NARAYANAN NAMBIAR, MANCHERI CHOYCHERI HOUSE, MANGALASSERRY, PATTUVAM, P.O.ARIYIL, TALIPARAMBA TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.KALEESWARAM RAJ RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, MINISTRY OF DEFENCE, NEW DELHI. 2. THE SENIOR RECORD OFFICER, MADRAS REGIMENT ABHILEKH KARYALAYA, RECORDS THE MADRAS REGIMENT, POST BAG NO.1, WILLINGTON, NILGIRIS-643 231. BY ADV. SRI.JOHN VARGHESE, ASSISTANT SG SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,ASST.SOLICITOR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 32883 of 2006 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1- TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE EXT.P2- TRUE COPY OF THE LEGAL HEIR CERTIFICATE DATED 23.11.90 EXT.P3- TRUE COPY OF THE DEATH CERTIFICATE WITH RESPECT TO LAKSHMIKUTTY AMMA EXT.P4- TRUE COPY OF LEGAL HEIR CERTIFICATE OBTAINED AFTER THE DEATH OF LAKSHMIKUTTY AMMA EXT.P5- TRUE COPY OF the CERTIFICATE DATED 29.3.06 ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, PATTUVAM EXT.P6- TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 12.6.06 EXT.P7- TRUE COPY OF THE RULES WITH RESPECT TO THE FAMILY PENSION EXT.P8- TRUE COPY OF THE COVER IN WHICH THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM WAS SENT EXT.P9- TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL SENT BY THE PETITIONER (TRUE COPY) P.A TO JUDGE V.GIRI, J ------------------- W.P.(C).32883/2006 -------------------- Dated this the 4th day of March, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner is the daughter of late P.Narayanan Nambiar, who was a Hawildar in Madras Regiment. Narayanan Nambiar died on 11.6.1990. Petitioner’s mother was receiving family pension. She died on 7.10.2005. Petitioner sought for family pension. This was declined on the premise that as per the Rules, sons/unmarried daughter are eligible for family pension upto the age of 25. Petitioner is 43 and therefore, she was denied family pension. This has been challenged in the writ petition. 2. Counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents. The justification for the original refusal to grant family pension is now not available consequent upon the removal of age limit for family pension in the Rules, vide Government of India, Ministry of Defence letter dated 25.10.2007. Petitioner cannot now be considered as ineligible. Paragraph 5 of the counter affidavit reads as follows: W.P.(C).32883/2006 2 As per rules then in force regarding grant of ordinary family pension for children, the petitioner was in no way eligible for grant of family pension. Hence this stand of respondent No.2 in rejecting the request for grant of ordinary family pension to the petitioner, vide Records the Madras Regiment letter No.2532717/FP/27/PG-2 dated 12th June, 2006 was correct and just. Now she has become eligible for grant of Family Pension with effect from 6th September, 2007 consequent to the removal of the age limit for Family Pension provided she is still unmarried and unemployed vide Government of India, Ministry of Defence letter No.1(3)/2007-D(Pen/Policy) dated 25th October, 2007. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that if the petitioner is not ineligible, her case will have to be considered by the authorities. This is true. 4. In the result, writ petition is disposed of directing the second respondent to process the petitioner’s W.P.(C).32883/2006 3 application for family pension in the light of the stand taken as indicated above and issue an authorization provided the petitioner is otherwise eligible, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Petitioner shall produce all the relevant records on requisition of the competent authority. V.GIRI, Judge mrcs