Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, widowed daughter of an ex‑Havildhar who died in 1988, applied for family pension after her mother (who was receiving the pension) died in 2014. Relying on a Central Government Circular dated 06.09.2007, which extends family pension to widowed daughters of ex‑servicemen, the petitioner submitted a proposal with all required documents on 05.07.2017 to the second respondent. Instead of processing the proposal, the second respondent passed the impugned order dated 21.09.2017, seeking additional documents. The petitioner challenged this order before the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court under Article 226, praying for certiorarified mandamus to quash the order and direct forwarding of the proposal without further delay. The court heard the petitioner’s counsel, who argued that the circular entitles her to pension and that the impugned order was passed without considering the documents already submitted. As the available record ends at the stage of filing, no decision or further analysis is recorded.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Family Pension - Entitlement - Widowed Daughter - Central Government Circular dated 06.09.2007 - Petitioner, widowed daughter of deceased Havildhar, sought family pension after mother's death; second respondent issued order requiring further documents; challenge to order (Paras 1-3).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the second respondent's order dated 21.09.2017 requiring additional documents for family pension proposal is valid, and whether the petitioner is entitled to forward the proposal without further documents.
Law Points
- Entitlement of widowed daughter to family pension under Central Government Circular dated 06.09.2007
