IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.13809 of 2008 Date of Decision: March 23, 2009 Reshma .....PETITIONER(S) VERSUS Union of India & Others .....RESPONDENT(S) . . . CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: - Mr. Surinder Sheoran, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. S.K. Sharma, Central Government Standing Counsel, for the respondents. . . . AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral) This civil writ petition filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India prays for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing Order dated 30.5.2007 (Annexure P-3). Vide the impugned order, claim of the petitioner for special family pension has been rejected. It transpires that husband of the petitioner died on 28.4.2005 on account of heart-attack (Acute Myocardial Infarction) while on annual leave. In the impugned order, it has been stated that the death was not in any way related to duties of military service and being not attributable to military service, the petitioner is not entitled to special family pension. The petitioner was given the right to file an appeal before CWP No.13809 of 2008 [2] the Appellate Committee. It seems that the petitioner did file an appeal as is evident from Annexure P-4. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that during the pendency of the writ petition, the appeal has been decided on 20.1.2009, however, the order has been conveyed vide a single line order in the following terms:- “Second Appeal 1. Reference Government of India, Ministry of Defence, letter No.2(116)/2007/D (Pen. A & C) dated 02 Jan 2009. 2 Your Second appeal against rejection of special family pension has been rejected by Government of India, Ministry of Defence letter quoted in para one above.” Learned counsel for the petitioner states that without knowing the contents and the basis of the order, the petitioner is not in a position to know the reasons for rejection of his claim. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this petition is disposed of with direction to the respondents to consider the second appeal of the petitioner afresh and pass a reasoned and speaking order. Needful be done within three months of the date of receipt of a certified copy of the order. (AJAI LAMBA) March 23, 2009 JUDGE avin