IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 3590 of 2009 Date of decision: 13.9.2011 Indra Devi …. Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Ors. ….Respondents Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta, J. Whether approved for reporting? For the petitioner: Mr. Rakesh Manta, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Vivek Singh Thakur, Addl. AG for respondents No. 1 to 3. Mr. Ashok Thakur, Central Govt. Counsel for respondents No. 4 and 5. Mr. R.S. Kanwar, Advocate, for respondent No.6. Mr. Sanjeev Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No.7. _____________________________________________________ Deepak Gupta, J(oral) 1. The dispute in this petition is between the heirs of late Shri Mangat Ram and revolves around the pension and retiral benefits payable on account of his death. 2. The admitted fact is that the deceased Mangat Ram was employed as Peon in the Health Department. It is also not disputed that he was earlier married to one Fishi Devi. From this wedlock three children Kanta Devi, Rajiv and Nisha Devi were born. All these children were more than 21 years of age at the time when Mangat Ram died. 2 3. The petitioner Indra Devi claims that Mangat Ram had performed a second marriage with her and in support of her claim she has filed the certificate issued by Gram Panchayat, Himri. After the death of Mangat Ram, Indra Devi claimed the pension and other retiral benefits from his employer, but some objections were raised that the difference of age between Indra Devi and the daughter was only 11 years and therefore, Indra Devi could not be the mother. It was then clarified that Indra Devi was the second wife and not the mother of the children born from the first wife. 4. Thereafter the son Rajiv filed a suit in the Court of learned Civil Judge(Senior Division), Theog, in which a declaration was sought that he and his sisters are the only heirs of Mangat Ram and entitled to receive the service benefits. It was alleged that Mangat Ram had never married the petitioner Indra Devi. This suit was dismissed by the learned trial Court after protracted trial and now I have been informed at the Bar that Rajiv has filed an appeal, which is pending before the learned Additional District Judge(Fast Track Court), Shimla. It is alleged that in this appeal Indra Devi is evading service. 5. From the above facts, it is apparent that as per the decree of the learned Civil Judge, Theog and the certificate issued by the Gram Panchayat, there is prima facie evidence to show that Indra Devi was married to Mangat Ram. Rajiv and his sisters were already majors and would not be entitled 3 to family pension. Therefore, there cannot be any dispute with regard to the family pension and, as such, respondents No. 1 to 5 are directed to release the arrears of family pension and pay family pension in future to Smt. Indra Devi and necessary action in this behalf be taken latest by 30th November, 2011. 6. As far as the other retiral benefits are concerned, respondents No. 1 to 5 are directed to calculate the entire retiral benefits payable in respect of the death of Mangat Ram and the same be deposited in the Court of learned Additional District Judge(Fast Track Court), Shimla by 30th November, 2011. The petitioner through Mr. Rakesh Manta, Advocate, is directed to put in appearance before the learned Additional District Judge(Fast Track Court), Shimla on 11th October, 2011. The learned Additional District Judge(Fast Track Court), Shimla is also directed to dispose of the appeal latest by 31st December, 2011 and the amount deposited by respondents No. 1 to 5 shall be disbursed in accordance with the judgment of the trial Court. 7. With these observations, the writ petition stands disposed of. No costs. September 13, 2011 (Deepak Gupta) (vt) Judge