IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No.: 976 of 2006. Decided on: 27.8.2008. Smt. Ramku Devi … … … Petitioner. Versus The Union of India and another. … … … Respondent. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, J. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the petitioner: Mr. Shashi Shirshoo, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Sandeep Sharma, Assistant Solicitor General of India. Rajiv Sharma, Judge: The brief facts necessary for the adjudication of this writ petition are that the husband of the petitioner was enrolled in the Indian Army, Unit 2nd Battalion, The Grenadiers on 3rd January, 1950. He was discharged from service on 31st March, 1967. He was not granted any pension under the Pension Regulations for the Army. Shri Polo Ram, husband of the petitioner died on 20.12.2004. The petitioner made a representation for the release of family pension. The same was replied by the respondents on 20th July, 2006. She served a legal notice upon the respondents through her Advocate on 25.7.2006. The said notice was replied by the Senior Record Officer on 10th August, 2006. The Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No. - 2 - principal stand of the respondents in the reply is that the family pension is granted only to those widows whose husbands were in receipt of any type of pension after retirement. The further contention of the respondents is that since the husband of the petitioner was enrolled as non-combatant (Mess Waiter); he was required to put in 20 years of service. Mr. Shashi Shirshoo has strenuously argued that his client is entitled to get family pension since according to him the petitioner’s husband had put in 17 years and 87 days service. Mr. Sandeep Sharma had strenuously argued that the petitioner is not entitled to any family pension on two grounds; (a) the husband of the petitioner was enrolled as non-combatant (Mess Waiter) and was required to put in 20 years of service as per Pension Regulation 145 and secondly, since the petitioner’s husband has not been granted pension, she is not entitled to family pension. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the pleadings carefully. It is not disputed by the parties that the petitioner’s husband was enrolled in the Indian Army, Unit 2nd Battalion, The Grenadiers on 3rd January, 1950 and he was discharged on 31st March, 1967. Mr. Shashi Shirshoo has drawn the attention of the Court to the discharge certificate, more particularly, to page 14 whereby in Column 9 (c) of the discharge certificate Army trade/class/qualifications has been scored off. On the basis of this, he submitted that since neither any Army trade/ class/qualification has been mentioned in this column 9, the petitioner’s husband was enrolled as a combatant and not a non-combatant. The Division Bench on 7.4.2008 has passed the following order:- - 3 - “The petitioner is the widow of Sh. Polo Ram who served in the Indian Army from 3rd January, 1950 to 31st March, 1967. As per the discharge certificate he was discharged on 31st March, 1967 on his own request after having completed 17 years and 87 days of service. Discharge certificate shows that the character of the husband of the petitioner was exemplary and he has served in the Army in various categories in India as well as Abroad. According to the parties no pension was granted in favour of Sh.Polo Ram. After his death Smt. Ramku Devi wife of Sh.Polo Ram made a representation that she be granted family pension. She also sent a notice through her counsel. In reply to the notice she was informed that she cannot be granted any family pension since her deceased husband Sh.Polo Ram was not in receipt of any pension whatsoever. The petitioner came to this Court. Here another defence has been raised. This defence is that Sh.Polo Ram was Non Combatant (Enrolled). To our mind Sh. Polo Ram was not a Non Combatant. Non Combatant shoulders are normally Cooks, Dhobies, Lascar, Sweeper, Mochi, Barbers etc. The discharge certificate of Sh.Polo Ram does not prima facie indicate that he belonged to any of these categories. In fact the list of Medals and decorations awarded in favour of Sh.Polo Ram indicates otherwise. Regulation 132 of the Army Pension Regulations clearly provides that the qualifying service for a Combatant is 15 years. It is only under Regulation 145 that the qualifying service is 20 years in the case of Non Combatants. The respondents shall within four weeks from today file another affidavit in which they shall clearly show how they have treated Sh.Polo Ram to be Non Combatant (Enrolled). It is made clear that if no affidavit is filed by the next date we shall treat Sh.Polo Ram as Combatant and decide the case accordingly.” - 4 - In sequel to order dated 7.4.2008, the respondents have filed the supplementary affidavit dated 12th May, 2008. The stand of the respondents-Union of India in the supplementary affidavit is that the petitioner’s husband was enrolled as non-combatant as Mess Waiter and not a combatant. It will be apt at this stage to refer to Army Regulation 145 which reads thus:- “145. The minimum qualifying service for earning a service pension is 20 years.” It is evident from the bare reading of para 145 of the Pension Regulations (Rules) that the non-combatant is required to complete 20 years service to get the pension. The petitioner’s husband has put in only 17 years and 87 days service as non-combatant in the Indian Army. The non-mentioning of Army trade/class/qualifications in column No.9 of the discharge certificate will not improve the case of the petitioner in any manner. It has been categorically stated as noticed above in the supplementary affidavit that petitioner’s husband in fact was enrolled as non-combatant. The non-mentioning of the trade, class or qualification in Column No.9 will not make the petitioners husband combatant. Accordingly, he was not entitled to get the pension. Since the husband of the petitioner was not granted pension, the petitioner is not entitled to family pension. Consequently, there is no merit in the writ petition and the same is dismissed. No costs. August 27, 2008. (Rajiv Sharma) (sck). Judge.