IN THE PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH LPA No. 1034 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision: July 26, 2011 State of Punjab and others ...Appellants Versus Ramanpreet Kaur and others ...Respondents CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. HON'BLE MR. HON'BLE MR. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.KUMAR JUSTICE M.M.KUMAR JUSTICE M.M.KUMAR JUSTICE M.M.KUMAR HON'BLE MR. HON'BLE MR. HON'BLE MR. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JUSTICE JUSTICE JUSTICE GURDEV SINGH GURDEV SINGH GURDEV SINGH GURDEV SINGH Present: Mr. Suvir Sehgal, Addl. AG, Punjab, for the appellants. Mr. R.K. Arora, Advocate, for the respondents. 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? M.M. KUMAR, J. M.M. KUMAR, J. M.M. KUMAR, J. M.M. KUMAR, J. 1. The instant appeal under Clause X of the Letters Patent is directed against the judgment dated 4.10.2010 rendered by the learned Single Judge holding that the dependants and children of a pre-deceased son would be deemed to be covered by the definition of expression ‘family’ within the meaning of Para 6.17(3) of the Scheme. The learned Single Judge by placing reliance on the provisions of Article 38 and 39(f) of the Constitution has opined that the Family Pension Scheme is a welfare subordinate legislation and, therefore, it calls for liberal interpretation. It has also been held that the expression used is ‘include’ which shows that it is LPA No. LPA No. LPA No. LPA No. 1034 1034 1034 1034 of 2011 (O&M) of 2011 (O&M) of 2011 (O&M) of 2011 (O&M) 2 illustrative and not exhaustive definition of ‘family’. Therefore, it has been concluded that the expression ‘family’ could not be construed to mean that it has excluded those blood relations who as a matter of fact were dependant upon the deceased employee who happen to be grand-father of the minor children. 2. Mr. R.K. Arora, learned counsel for the writ petitioner- respondents has, at the outset pointed out that the writ petitioner- respondents filed C.O.C.P. No. 1145 of 2011 and on 27.5.2011 a statement was made before the Contempt Court that the department had not filed an appeal and the direction issued by the learned Single Judge had attained finality. The Contempt Court also noticed that a PPO had already been issued in favour of the writ petitioner-respondents on 27.5.2011 itself. Mr. Arora further states that in pursuance of issuance of PPO, the writ petitioner- respondents have started drawing family pension. 3. On a point of fact we have noticed that the instant appeal was filed before this Court on 30.5.2011, although the appeal has been prepared on 26.5.2011 as the affidavit of Shri Major Singh, District Education Officer (EE), Mansa, suggests. 4. Mr. Suvir Sehgal, learned Additional Advocate General, Punjab, has argued that the Courts would not be competent to add another category of person to the Family Pension Scheme and, therefore, the interpretation adopted by the learned Single Judge is not sustainable in the eyes of law. In that regard, learned counsel has placed reliance on para 8 of the judgment of Hon’ble the Supreme Court rendered in the case of State of Punjab and another State of Punjab and another State of Punjab and another State of Punjab and another v. v. v. v. Devinder Kaur Devinder Kaur Devinder Kaur Devinder Kaur, (1999) , (1999) , (1999) , (1999) 9 SCC 12 9 SCC 12 9 SCC 12 9 SCC 12. LPA No. LPA No. LPA No. LPA No. 1034 1034 1034 1034 of 2011 (O&M) of 2011 (O&M) of 2011 (O&M) of 2011 (O&M) 3 5. Be that as it may, in this appeal the judgment passed by the learned Single Judge has already been implemented and we dispose of the appeal by observing that the view taken by the learned Single Judge would not have any precedential value and the same may not be cited as such particularly when we have noticed the argument on the basis of Devinder Kaur’s case (supra) Devinder Kaur’s case (supra) Devinder Kaur’s case (supra) Devinder Kaur’s case (supra). Accordingly, we leave the aforesaid question open to be decided in an appropriate case. The appeal is accordingly disposed of. (M.M. KUMAR) (M.M. KUMAR) (M.M. KUMAR) (M.M. KUMAR) JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE (GURDEV SINGH GURDEV SINGH GURDEV SINGH GURDEV SINGH) July July July July 26 26 26 26, 201 201 201 2011 JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE Pkapoor