IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI TUESDAY, THE 24TH JUNE 2008 / 3RD ASHADHA 1930 WP(C).No. 19000 of 2008(J) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ R.PRIYA, W/O.NO.13984452 F SEP/AA, R.PRADEEP KUMAR, PUTHIYARETHU HOUSE, KANNAMANGALAM NORTH,CHETTIKULANGARA P.O, MAVELIKKARA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. KERALA-690 106. BY ADV. SRI.R.RAMADAS RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF DEFENCE, NEW DELHI. 2. THE COMMANDING OFFICER, 331 FIELD HOSPITAL, PIN-903 331. C/O 56 APO. 3. R.PRADEEP KUMAR, S/O.RADHAKRISHNA MENON, KALEECKAL VEEDU, AKKANATTUKARA MURI, THAZHAKKARA VILLAGE, MAVELIKKARA. BY ADV. SRI. AJITH PRAKASH FOR R1 & R2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI,J. ------------------------- W.P ( C) No. 19000 of 2008 -------------------------- Dated this the 24th June, 2008 J U D G M E N T I heard learned counsel for the petitioner Sri.R.Ramadas and learned counsel appearing for respondents 1 and 2. In the circumstances, it may not be necessary to issue notice to 3rd respondent. 2. Third respondent is the husband of the petitioner. Apparently, the couple are now living separately. There are cases pending before the Family Court, Alappuzha with regard to the guardianship of minor child and also for restitution of conjugal rights filed by the 3rd respondent. 3. The Officials of the Ministry of Defence, wherein, the 3rd respondent is working has sanctioned maintenance allowance to the petitioner and her daughter deductible from the pay and allowances of the 3rd respondent, as evidenced by Exhibit-P1. It seems that in the meanwhile, 3rd respondent filed an application for voluntary retirement. His pension papers have therefore been W.P ( C) No. 19000 of 2008 2 forwarded to the petitioner for counter signature by the petitioner. Petitioner apprehends that if she signs the papers and forwards to the authorities, there is possibility of the 3rd respondent receiving the entire retiral benefits without making a provision for his wife and child. Therefore, objections have been raised by the petitioner, as per Exhibit-P3 pending before the 2nd respondent. Respondents 1 and 2 are competent to make an appropriate provision safeguarding the interests of the wife and child of the officer in question. In the result, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to consider Exhibit-P3 and pass orders thereon, at any rate, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Processing of the pension papers submitted by the 3rd respondent shall be done, after a decision is taken on Exhibit-P3. Third respondent shall also be heard by the 2nd respondent in the matter of these objections, before a decision is taken on Exhibit-P3. (V.GIRI, JUDGE) ma W.P ( C) No. 19000 of 2008 3 W.P ( C) No. 19000 of 2008 4