Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Smt. Noor Jahan Begum vs Union Of India Through Its Secretary on 16 May, 2014
Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench, New Delhi O.A.No.2774/2013 Friday, this the 16th day of May 2014 Honble Shri A.K. Bhardwaj, Member (J) Smt. Noor Jahan Begum w/o late Shri Bundu Khan r/o T-1 Huts, Punchseel Enclave New Delhi-17 .. Applicant (By Advocate: Shri Vijay Chandra Jha) Versus 1. Union of India through its Secretary Department of Posts, India New Delhi 2. Assistant Director General (Legal) Ministry of Communications & Information, Technology II Floor, Dak Bhawan, New Delhi-1 3. The Senior Superintendent Department of Posts, India Air Mail STG. Division, New Delhi-21 ..Respondents (By Advocate: Shri Amit Anand) O R D E R (ORAL)
Late Shri Bundu Khan, who was employed as Mailman at Air Mail Sorting Division, New Delhi, retired from service on superannuation on 31.3.2001. On his retirement, he was granted monthly pension in accordance with the Rules. When in the year 2005, i.e., on 9.6.2005, Shri Bundu Khan passed-away, one of his wives, namely, Smt. Shahjahan Begum had already passed away on 6.10.2002, thus family pension was sanctioned to the applicant herein. She received the same from 1.4.2007 to 31.8.2007. The payment of family pension could be stopped on account of some doubt regarding applicants identity, i.e., whether she is Noorjahan Begum, i.e., widow of late Shri Bundu Khan or Badlo Khatoon. In the circumstances, she was required to get her claim for family pension settled from the Court, thus the applicant filed the present Original Application praying therein:
a) Issue an order or direction directing the Respondents to initiate appropriate proceedings/steps for granting/continuing the Family Pension to the Applicant.
b) Issue direction to pay arrears of Family Pension with interest.
c) Award cost of the Application and
d) Grant such other and further reliefs as are warranted by the circumstances of this case and deemed proper in the interest of justice.
2. Learned counsel for applicant contended that once being satisfied regarding the identity of the applicant the respondents had sanctioned family pension to her, there is no basis for sudden change in their stand.
3. On the other hand, Shri Amit Anand, learned counsel for respondents submitted that despite verification conducted by it, the Department was not satisfied regarding the identity of the applicant, i.e., whether she is Noorjahan Begum, i.e., widow of late Shri Bundu Khan or Badlo Khatoon or she has two names, thus the respondents are fully justified in asking her to produce either a succession certificate to show that the applicant is widow of late Shri Bundu Khan or some valid documents to show that she is Badlo Khatoon as well as Noorjahan Begum.
4. I heard the learned counsels for the parties and perused the records.
5. It seen that the applicant has placed certain documents on record but none of those reflect that prior to 2007 her name was also Noorjahan Begum. Rather the applicant herself has executed an affidavit dated 5.10.2012 stating therein that she changed her name from Badlo Khatoon to Noorjahan Begum for all purposes. The voter identity produced by the applicant to espouse that she is Noorjahan Begum is dated 7.7.2012.
6. In the circumstances, the respondents are justified in asking the applicant to produce valid document to establish her identity as Noorjahan Begum or to produce a succession certificate to claim family pension as widow of late Shri Bundu Khan.
7. Accordingly, the present Original Application is disposed of with liberty to the applicant to satisfy the respondents about her identity as Noorjahan Begum w/o late Shri Bundu Khan by producing the documents to their satisfaction. On production of such document, the respondents would release family pension with arrears in her favour. No costs.
( A. K. Bhardwaj ) Member (J) May 16, 2014 /sunil/