High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Smt. Meena Kumari Alias Smt. Moti Raj And Another v. Union Of India And Others - WRIT - C No. 77407 of 2005  RD-AH 7960 (21 December 2005)
Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.77407 of 2005
Smt. Meena Kumari alias Smt. Moti Raj & Anr.
Union of India & Ors.
Hon'ble Dr. B.S. Chauhan, J.
Hon'ble Dilip Gupta, J.
This writ petition has been filed claiming following reliefs:-
(1) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to pay compensation for the loss and death of late Ramanand Singh while discharging his duties as a Senior Rakshak of Railway Protection Force at Railway Station Aligarh Junction on 13.09.1965.
(2) to issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to produce the post mortem report, if any, of late Ramanand Singh, the Senior Rakshak No. 651-A of Railway Protection Force posted at Railway Station Aligarh Junction, who was found dead on 14.09.1965 while performing his duties as Senior Rakshak.
The facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that one Ramanand Singh, husband of petitioner no.1 and father of petitioner no.2 had been appointed in the Railway Protection Force in 1951. He was found dead on 14.09.1965. Subsequently, the petitioners had been making the demand for various reliefs. They filed Original Application No. 428 of 1987, Meena Kumari Vs. General Manager, Northern Railway & Ors., before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna for grant of family pension. Subsequently, they also approached the Patna High Court. The Patna High Court on the ground of territorial jurisdiction, transferred the record of the writ petition to this Court vide order dated 3rd August, 1993. This Court allowed the Writ Petition No. 7792 of 1995 on 24.09.2003. After succeeding in the said case, an application was filed on 09.09.2004 claiming compensation for unnatural death of said Shri Ramanand Singh. As the same has not been decided, this petition has been filed claiming the aforesaid reliefs.
We have heard Shri B.N. Tewari, learned counsel for the petitioners and Shri Govind Saran for the respondents.
There is no explanation in the petition as to why the relief has been claimed at such a belated stage, i.e. after expiry of about four decades and if the issue had been agitated in respect of other claims and the petitioner succeeded in getting the family pension, why this relief could not be claimed in the same petition. As the Order II Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure bars the said petition, it is difficult for this Court to assume that after 40 years of his death, it would be possible for the Court to determine the cause of his death and to adjudicate upon the amount of compensation on the basis that he died of unnatural death.
Petition is dismissed only on the ground of delay and latches.
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.