Research › Search › Judgment

Tripura High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 444 (TRI)

Kanchan Devi v. State of Tripura

2015-06-30

DEEPAK GUPTA, S.C.DAS

body2015
JUDGMENT : Deepak Gupta, J. By means of this petition, the petitioner has challenged the action of the respondents in releasing the pension and other retiral benefits due and payable in respect of her son deceased Dharam Nath Roy in favour of his wife respondent No.9 Smt. Archana Kumari. 2. The undisputed facts are that Dharam Nath Roy was employed in the Tripura State Rifles. It is also not disputed that he was married to Archana Kumari. After Dharam Nath Roy died the applicants obtained succession certificate that they were successors of deceased Dharam Nath Roy. The succession certificate which was granted reads as follows :- “This succession certificate is accordingly granted to applicants (1) Raghunath Roy son of Late Tengari Roy (2) Kanchan Devi wife of Raghunath Roy (3) Dhurabhanath Roy (4) Surajnath Roy. Both sons of Raghunath Roy all resident of Mohalla Pakari P.S. Ara Nawada Distt. Bhojpur authorizing her for withdrawal of aforesaid amount.” 3. To say the least, the grant of the succession certificate shows scant knowledge of the judicial officer in respect to the laws of inheritance. Under Hindu Law only the wife and the mother were entitled to succession. The father and the siblings had no right to succeed to the estate of the deceased. In the application for grant of succession certificate the name of Arahcana Kumari was mentioned. It is alleged that she has remarried. Even if it is assumed that she had remarried she would not cease to be one of the legal heirs of Late Dharam Nath Roy. This certificate was granted by the Sub-Judge, Bhojpur, District – Ara, Bihar and all that this Court can say is that the Judge did not know the provisions of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956. 4. The wife obtained a survival certificate later issued by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Southern Area, Bhojpur in which only the name of the wife is mentioned as the legal heir of the deceased. This certificate does not take into consideration the fact that the mother is also the legal heir. We may indicate that these succession certificate and survival certificate will in fact have no relevance to grant of pension because pension is governed by the Pension Rules and all the legal heirs are not necessarily entitled to pension. This certificate does not take into consideration the fact that the mother is also the legal heir. We may indicate that these succession certificate and survival certificate will in fact have no relevance to grant of pension because pension is governed by the Pension Rules and all the legal heirs are not necessarily entitled to pension. As far as pension is concerned, the pension is primarily payable to the widow or minor children and the dependent parents are entitled to get pension only in case the widow has died or has remarried. 5. It is urged by Mr. A Lodh that the widow has remarried and, therefore, she is not appearing in the Court and presumption may be drawn that she is remarried and pension be ordered to be paid to the parents. We are afraid that in writ proceedings we cannot pass such order. The proper course is for the petitioner to file a civil suit in Bihar itself where the respondent is residing and there if they prove the widow has remarried then they can obtain a judgment against the widow and then approach the employer for grant of pension. 6. With these observations the writ petition is disposed of.