Heard Sri S.R.Singh learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Ashok Bhagnagar learned counsel for the respondent no.3 and the learned standing counsel for the respondent nos.1 and 2.
The petitioner's husband Ram Kumar was an employee on the post of Lekhpal in the Revenue Department who died while in service on 27.1.2012. Consequent upon the death of the petitioner's husband,she filed a writ petition before this Court claiming certain benefit by making the following prayer:
"(i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated10.7.2012 passed by the respondent no.2 (contained as Annexure No.6 to this writ petition);
(ii) issue a writ,order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent No.2to release the dues which are liable to be payable due to death of her husband and also appoint the petitioner on the basis of compassionate ground under Dying in Harness Rules,1974.
(iii)issue such writ,orders or directions as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case."
By means of the impugned order dated 10.7.2012, the District Magistrate while considering the grievance has passed a detailed order which indicates that the pensionary benefit, as well as consideration for appointment under Dying in Harness Rules,1974 of the legal heirs of late Ram Kumar are deferred due to on going dispute between the two wives namely Smt.Anita Devi (petitioner) and Smt. Meena Devi who claims to be the legal heir of late Ram Kumar being the second legally wedded wife after grant of divorce by the competent court.
It may be relevant to note that Smt. Anita Devi was the first wife of late Ram Kumar who was divorced under a decree passed in Family Court Case No.464 of 2003 on 7.3.2009. The aforesaid decree of the Family Court was challenged in the First Appeal No.225 of 2009 before this Court and was finally dismissed by order dated 14.8.2012.The operative part of the order dated 14.8.2012 is re-produced below:
"Here,the learned counsel for the appellant submits that there is no dispute with regard to the estate left by the deceased in these proceedings and the deceased has left no heir. In this factual scenario, in our view only the appeal shall abate. The appellant has not taken any steps to substitute heir of the deceased respondent,if any, therefore,the appeal abates.
In the result, the appeal is dismissed as abated."
It is clear from the operative part of the order that the proceedings as a consequence of death of late Ram Kumar stood abated and the appeal was dismissed as such. A review application No.277225 of 2012 of the aforesaid judgment was filed by the petitioner which was dismissed on 29.4.2013.
The fact of the matter remains that as a consequence of the dismissal of First Appeal due to the death of late Ram Kumar a decision on merit with respect to a decree of divorce could not be rendered.
Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner during the ongoing proceedings has not married and is living with her parents.On the other hand Smt. Meena Devi who married late Ram Kumar after the divorce decree being passed by the Family Court also stepped into his life and out of the wedlock a child (son) was born who is five years of age and is a minor.
Between the two legal heirs who claim to be the widows of late Ram Kumar, the bone of contention is post death service benefits, pensionary benefit and a claim under Dying in Harness Rules which is a subject matter of litigation in this writ petition.
With respect to the aforesaid three benefits i.e. post death service benefit, pensionary benefit and claim under the Dying in Harness Rules, it is agreed between the parties that as far as family pension is concerned, right thereto is relinquished by Smt.Meena Devi and she surrenders this right in favour of the petitioner and she shall not claim any interest in the matter of family pension.
As far as the post death service benefits are concerned, it is agreed between the parties that 1/4th share shall be parted with by Smt. Meena Devi in favour of the petitioner who is ready to accept the same without making any protest or claim whatsoever. The petitioner has accepted above two settlements as full and final. Smt. Meena shall be entitled to 3/4th of the post death service benefits.
As far as right of consideration under the Dying in Harness Rules is concerned, it is agreed before this Court that the petitioner shall not lay any claim to that effect and any application under the Dying in Harness Rules made by Smt. Meena, shall be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.
Learned standing counsel who has represented respondent no.1 and 2 has no objection to the aforesaid compromise and has also expressed no objection to the aforesaid agreement which has been entered into between the parties through their counsel.
If an application is made by Smt. Meena under Dying in Harness Rules, the same shall be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of making a representation along with a certified copy of this order. It is clarified that there shall be no scope for any kind of objection to be raised by the parties in the matter of claims settled before this Court.
With the aforesaid observations, this writ petition is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 5.5.2014 mna (Attau Rahman Masoodi,J.)