JUDGMENT 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.Service is complete. 1. We do not find any merit in this appeal. The only grievance raised on behalf of the appellant is that while directing to release the family pension, the learned Single Judge has directed to grant family pension in equal proportion to mother of the deceased as well as widow of the deceased. Apparently, according to the learned counsel the family pension can be granted only to the widow and mother cannot be granted any family pension in the presence of widow. We are unable to accept these contentions. The claim of family pension contained in Chapter IV of the Pension Regulation of the Air Force Act 1961 specifically provide in Rule 191 that a family pension is intended for the support of all the eligible members of a family, irrespective of in whose name it stands. Clause 192 of the Regulation further identifies that the members of the family of a deceased individual who shall be viewed as eligible for the grant of a special family pension, provided that they are otherwise qualified : 1. Widow, lawfully married. 2. Father. 3. Mother. 4. Sons, actual and legitimate. 5. Daughter, actual and legitimate. Rule 195 makes a relative specified in regulation 192 shall be eligible for the grant of family pension, provided : (a) he or she is not in receipt of another pension from Government; (b) he or she is not employed under Government. 2. In that case, a mother, who is a widow at the time of her son's death or who becomes a widow thereafter, has not remarried, is eligible for family pension. 3. These provisions clearly indicate that a mother not only is one of the eligible candidates, she becomes entitled to pension even if she becomes eligible after the death of her son and has the qualification as required in Regulation 195, and even if after the death of her son the pension has been released In favour of the widow. Regulation 195 clearly postulates that for the benefit of each dependent member of the family the pension can be granted in the name of one person. 4. In the present case, it is apparent from the assertions made by the petitioner herself that her widowed mother-in-law is not living with her. Regulation 195 clearly postulates that for the benefit of each dependent member of the family the pension can be granted in the name of one person. 4. In the present case, it is apparent from the assertions made by the petitioner herself that her widowed mother-in-law is not living with her. Therefore, while granting relief for the benefit of family that appropriate orders are made by learned Single Judge. 5. In view thereof, we do not find any merit in this appeal. The appeal is dismissed. 6. Learned counsel for the appellant has invited our attention that initially a cross appeal has been filed by the UOI against the very same order. We find that the civil special appeal against that very order has been dismissed on 2.4.1998 by the Division Bench in the presence of learned counsel present for the appellant.Appeal Dismissed - Fact that appeal of union of India on same point has been dismissed noted. *******