Court: - Hon'ble High Court of Allahabad
Parties: Smt. Kiran Sonkar v. State of U.P., (Allahabad)
Case Details: Writ Appeal No. - 576 of 2023. D/d. 6.2.2023.
Citation: Law Finder Doc Id # 2188535 2023(157) ALR 397: 2023(177) FLR 546 : 2023(2) All WC 1575
Judgment: “Nomination does not create any right or title in the property - Civil litigation or matrimonial dispute cannot be a ground to exclude the wife from terminal benefits unless there has been a valid divorce."
...Nomination has been made in favour of brother - Even, if nomination has been made in favour of some other person or any reference has been made with regard to a legal or matrimonial dispute with wife in service book, that cannot be a ground for excluding the wife unless a valid divorce decree has been passed - After death, gratuity, pension and terminal benefits shall be paid strictly in accordance with Rule 3(3), Rule 5(1) and Rule 6 of Rules, 1961 - Petitioner being legally wedded wife is fully entitled for terminal benefits.
- Reasoning Given by Hon’ble Court:
1. From the perusal of Rule 6 of Rules, 1961, it is apparently clear that in case, the officer is having a family, nomination shall not be made in favour of any other person except family members. In present case, undisputedly, deceased employee was having his family members and also he has made nomination for compassionate appointment in favour of his son, but for terminal benefits, it has been made in favour of his brother, which is not permissible in case his wife is alive as -PARA 16.
2. In the present case, facts are not disputed. Nomination has been made in favour of brother for Gratuity, Leave Encashment and other terminal benefits, which is not permissible under Rule 3(3), Rule 5(1) & Rule 6 of Rules, 1961 in light of definition of family. Brother below the age of 18 years may be entitled for pensionary benefits in case other members of family mentioned in Rule 3(i)(ii) (iii) & (iv) of Rules, 1961 are not available. Civil Litigation or matrimonial dispute between husband and wife cannot be a ground to exclude the wife from terminal benefits. Even, if nomination has been made in favour of some other person or any reference has been made with regard to a legal or matrimonial dispute with wife in service book, that cannot be a ground for excluding the wife for gratuity, pension & other terminal benefits, unless a valid divorce decree has been passed between husband and wife. No such decree of divorce is on record between deceased employee and his wife, petitioner before this Court. PARA 21.
3. Therefore, after death, gratuity, pension and terminal benefits shall be paid strictly in accordance with Rule 3(3), Rule 5(1) & Rule 6 of Rules, 1961 and any nomination made in service book contrary to the Rules, 1961 cannot be accepted. Petitioner being legally wedded wife is fully entitled for terminal benefits. PARA 22.
- Case law referred by Hon’ble Court:
1. Chandra Kali v. State of U.P. Writ A No. 3288 of 2017.
2.Gangubai Bhagwan Salawade v. Smt. Chimanabai Suryabhan Salawade 2004 (4) ALLMR 238 Bombay.
3.Ram Chander Talwar v. Devender umar Talwar 2011 (2) AWC 1576 (SC).
4.Virendra Kumar Srivastava v. The Hon'ble High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Through Re dealing Service Single No. 2532 of 2014.
Click here to read the Judgement
Pl Like, share and subscribe also to our Youtube channel https://youtu.be/HiTUB93P3AM
0 Comments