Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2000 DIGILAW 997 (PNJ)

Gurmit Kaur v. Govt. of India

2000-08-25

R.L.ANAND

body2000
JUDGMENT R.L. Anand, J. - Petitioner Gurmit Kaur wife of Lance Naik Amrik Singh has filed the present writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India seeking the directions of the Court by way of a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the order vide which the benefit of the Group Insurance Death Benefits Scheme has been withheld. The petitioner has sought the directions of this Court against the respondent-authorities that the respondent-authorities be directed to release benefits of the Group Insurance Death Benefits Scheme to her. 2. Some facts can be noticed in the following manner :- The husband of the petitioner was enrolled in the Army on 9.5.1974. He was on the active duty and was sent for CVD Avadi for depositing the discarded vehicles. On 6.6.1987, the husband of the petitioner went to the platform of Railway Station, Daunt, in order to buy eatables and, thereafter, he never returned and joined his Unit. The petitioner made several representations to the respondent-authorities in order to know the whereabouts of her husband but to no effect. Amrik Singh, according to the petitioner, is missing since 6.6.1987 and his civil death shall be presumed and, therefore, she is entitled to the benefits of the Group Insurance Death Benefits Scheme. 3. Two sets of written statements were filed. The first written statement has been filed on behalf of respondents 1 to 4 and the second written statement has been filed by respondent No. 5. The stand of respondents 1 to 4 is that the husband of the petitioner became a deserter w.e.f. 6.6.1987 and later on he was dismissed from service on 6.6.1990. The stand of respondent No. 5 is that under the direction of this Court and on compassionate grounds, a sum of Rs. 75,000/- by way of Group Insurance Death Benefits Scheme has been released to the petitioner. The amount has been accepted by the petitioner without any protest and now she has no claim for the remaining amount. 4. I have heard the counsel for the parties and with their assistance have gone through the record of this case. 5. The controversy in the present writ petition is very short as to whether Amrik Singh is to be treated as a deserter as alleged by respondent- authorities. 4. I have heard the counsel for the parties and with their assistance have gone through the record of this case. 5. The controversy in the present writ petition is very short as to whether Amrik Singh is to be treated as a deserter as alleged by respondent- authorities. If the answer of this Court is in the negative, the consequences will follow and after considering the rival contentions of the parties, this Court is inclined to hold that Amrik Singh cannot be held to be a deserter. From the conduct of the respondent-authorities, it is evident that they had released Rs. 75,000/- to the petitioner treating as if he had met with a civil death because his whereabouts are totally unknown to those persons who in the ordinary course could know the same. Amrik Singh was last seen on 6.6.1987 and after the expiry of seven years, it has to be inferred that Amrik Singh met with death. In these circumstances, the onus is upon the respondent- authorities to show that Amrik Singh was seen after 6.6.1987. 6. The ancillary point for determination is whether the petitioner is entitled to any remaining amount of Group Insurance Death Benefits Scheme or not. 7. In para-20 of the writ petition, the petitioner has specifically alleged that as per the rules and regulations of the Army, she is entitled to the Army Group Insurance Cover amounting to Rs. 1 lac. This part of the pleadings is also corroborated from the document, Annexure P-2, in which similar allegations have been levelled by the petitioner. There is no denial; specific or by implication, either by respondents 1 to 4 or respondent No. 5 in this regard. In this view of the matter, it has to be inferred that this part of the case of the petitioner has been admitted by the respondent- authorities. Meaning thereby, that under the Group Insurance Death Benefits Scheme, a widow is entitled to the benefit of Rs. 1 lac. Only Rs. 75,000/- have been paid in this case to the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled to the balance amount of Rs. 25,000/-. 8. Accordingly, I allow this writ petition and directions are given to the respondents to release the balance amount of Rs. 1 lac. Only Rs. 75,000/- have been paid in this case to the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled to the balance amount of Rs. 25,000/-. 8. Accordingly, I allow this writ petition and directions are given to the respondents to release the balance amount of Rs. 25,000/- to the petitioner within three months from the receipt of a copy of this order, failing which the petitioner shall be entitled to interest @12%. Petition allowed.