102(K) of 2012
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (The High Court of Assam, Nagaland, Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh) Permanent Bench Kohima Case No: WP(C) 102(K) of 2012 Smti. Lhoukie-ii, Mother of Late Keduongulie Angami, IV Nagaland Police Battalion, Thizama, Kohima, Nagaland. Permanent resident of Dihoma Village, Kohima, Nagaland. …… Petitoner -Versus- 1. The State of Nagaland represented through the Chief Secretary to the Government of Nagaland Nagaland, Kohima. 2. The Secretary to the Government of Nagaland, Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms, Nagaland, Kohima. 3. The Finance Commissioner to the Government of Nagaland, Nagaland, Kohima. 4. The Commissioner and Secretary, Department of Home, Nagaland, Kohima. 5. The Director General of Police Nagaland, Police Head Quarters, Nagaland, Kohima. Page 1 of 4 WP(C) 102(K) of 2012 6. The Commandant, IV Nagaland Armed Police Battalion, Thizama, Kohima, Nagaland. 7. The Accountant General Nagaland, Kohima, Nagaland. …… Respondents -BEFORE- HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N. CHAUDHURY For the Petitioner : Mr. Zulu Jamir Mr. Justin Magh Mr. N Thowasie Ms. A Ayangla Advocates For the Respondents : Mr. NM Jamir Advocates Date of Hearing : 07.04.2014 Date of delivery of Judgment and Order : 07.04.2014 JUDGMENT AND ORDER (ORAL) The writ petitioner who is a senior citizen has approached this Court, by filing this writ petition claiming Extraordinary Family Pension on account of death of her son while in action as a constable under the Nagaland Armed police Battallion. This prayer has been made on the basis of an Office Memorandum issued by the Government providing that Extraordinary Family Pension is admissible to family of police personnel, killed in action/encounter or hazardous situation while on duty. The quantum of such pension is equal to last pay and allowances Page 2 of 4 WP(C) 102(K) of 2012 drawn by the deceased police personnel and is admissible till the date on which the deceased government servant would have retired on superannuation. The Office memorandum further provides that after expiry of the usual date of superannuation of the police personnel killed in action, the family pension admissible should be equal to the amount which would have been admissible under normal rules. 2. The son of the petitioner was a constable in 4, Nagaland Armed Police. He participated in the police action held in defending the border of the State of Nagaland but unfortunately, he was found missing in the border since 05.06.1985. Search to find him out having failed, the Government presumed that he had died in action and thereupon his pension case was forwarded to the Accountant General of Nagaland vide letter dated 08.02.1986. The Accountant General granted only a death gratuity to the father of the deceased constable by authority letter dated 09.06.1986 with an intimation to the Commandant of 4, Nagaland Armed Police. 3. The deceased constable was an un-married youth, aged about 23 years when he made supreme sacrifice for the State. Since thereafter, his old mother has been running from pillar to post for last 28 years ventilating her grievance for getting Extraordinary Family Pension against the supreme sacrifice made by her son for the State but the State does not appear to have sympathetically considered her appeal. Although the Deputy Inspector of General of Police (HQR) by a letter dated 16.06.2009 requested the Home Commissioner of the State to consider the case of the present petitioner for granting Extraordinary Family Pension, neither the representation submitted by the petitioner nor the recommendation made by the employer of the deceased constable has been considered. The recommendation made by the D.I.G. (HQR) must be collecting dust till now without any consideration. It is Page 3 of 4 WP(C) 102(K) of 2012 really a sorry state of affairs that a constable having laid down his life for the State has not been honoured even by granting extraordinary family pension to his mother although there is an Office memorandum for such purpose. 4. After hearing Mr. Justin Magh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. NM Jamir, learned Senior Government Advocate, who is representing respondents No. 5 and 6 in this case, I feel inclined to dispose of this writ petition directing the respondents to grant Extraordinary Family Pension in terms of the provision of Office Memorandum dated 14.01.1980 to the petitioner. This shall be done within a period of 3 months from today. A cheque covering full arrear payments shall be delivered to the door step of the writ petitioner before expiry of this period of three months. 5. This writ petition is disposed of. 6. No order as to cost. JUDGE R. biswaS Page 4 of 4 WP(C) 102(K) of 2012 .