Murderer can’t be denied pension if case not linked to hubby’s death: HC
Saurabh Malik
Tribune News Service
Chandigarh, January 31
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has made it clear that a family is debarred from getting family pension if involved in committing or abetting the murder of a government employee “on the old fable that one cannot kill the goose which lays the golden eggs”, but a government employee’s widow cannot be denied pension on account of her conviction in a murder case unrelated to her husband’s death.
The ruling by Justice GS Sandhawalia came on a petition by a widow for releasing family pension and other admissible benefits after her husband’s death during service in November 2008.
Justice Sandhawalia observed that the reasoning given to deny the benefits was that the petitioner’s conduct was not good as she had been convicted by court.
The Bench, during the course of hearing, was told that the petitioner’s husband was working as teacher in the Education Department on regular basis since 1986.
He died, leaving behind his wife and children, and the petitioner continued to draw monthly financial assistance for some time.
She was involved in an FIR registered in July 2009 and was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment in November 2011.
Justice Sandhawalia observed that the relevant rule talked about withholding or withdrawing pension in case of a pensioner’s conviction for a serious crime or if found guilty of gross misconduct, but the same did not refer to the family receiving financial aid.
“It is not disputed that the petitioner has committed the offence of murder and is on bail and her sentence has been suspended.
“Therefore, she requires to maintain herself and cannot be denied financial assistance. It is not a bounty as such and is her right on account of the services rendered by her husband to the government,” Justice Sandhawalia observed.
Referring to the Family Pension Rules, Justice Sandhawalia asserted that the petitioner was denied family pension on account of her conviction for murder, but the conviction was not on account of murdering her husband and the provision could not be relied upon by Haryana and other respondents to deny the claim.
“The purpose behind Rule 4-A(a) of the Family Pension Rules, 1964, is to debar the family members from getting family pension if they are involved in committing the murder or abetting the murder of the government employee,” Justice Sandhawalia observed.
Holding that the order denying pension to the petitioner due to her conviction was unrelated to her husband’s death, Justice Sandhawalia ruled that it was not sustainable and should accordingly be set aside.
