Bombay High Court
LATA RANGRAO DESHPANDE SINCE DECEASED THROUGH LRS RENUKADAS RANGRAON DESHPANDEversusTHE UNION OF INDIA THROUGH UNDER SECRETARY AND OTHERS
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
Holding
The petitioner is entitled to the family pension arrears, and the writ petition is allowed.
Summary
The petitioner, son of the late Lata Rangrao Deshpande, filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking arrears of family pension for a freedom fighter who died in February 2019. The deceased had two wives; the first wife never claimed the pension, while the second wife was later nominated but died in February 2023 before receiving any payments. The petitioner submitted all required documents, yet the Union Ministry of Home Affairs refused payment on a technical ground that the nominee’s name was not in the original identification documents. The High Court held that the respondents' hyper‑technical approach frustrated the purpose of the freedom‑fighters pension scheme and that the petitioner, as legal heir of the second wife, is entitled to the pension arrears. Consequently, the Court issued a writ of mandamus directing the Union to release the arrears from February 2019 to January 2023 and to allow the petitioner to withdraw the amounts from the State Bank of India account.
Issues considered
- Whether the second wife, nominated after the first wife’s death, is entitled to the family pension of a freedom fighter.
- Whether the petitioner, as legal heir of the second wife, can claim the arrears of family pension.
- Whether the respondents’ refusal based on the absence of the nominee’s name in original identification documents is legally valid.
- Whether a writ of mandamus is the appropriate remedy to compel payment of the pension arrears.
Subjects
- Family pension
- Freedom fighters
- Nominee
- Heirship certificate
- Writ of mandamus
- Article 226
- Pension arrears
- Hyper‑technical approach
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:46482-DB
1 WP4687/2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD.
WRIT PETITION NO.4687 OF 2023
Smt. Lata w/o. Rangrao Deshpande
Since deceased, through her L.R.
Renukadas s/o. Rangraon Deshpande,
Age : 68 years, Occu : Pensioner
(Retired Lecturer), R/o. Deshpande Galli,
Ganesh Park, Parli-Vaijnath,
District – Beed. ..Petitioner
Versus
1. The Union of India,
Through: Under Secretary,
Ministry of Home Affairs,
Freedom Fighters & Rehabilitation Division,
West Zone Section, 2nd Floor, NDCC-II Building,
Jaising Marg, New Delhi.
2. The State of Maharashtra
Through: The Secretary, Home Department,
(Freedom Fighters Cell), Mantralaya,
Hutatma Rajguru Chowk, Madam Kama
Road, Mumbai.
3. The Collector, Beed,
District-Beed.
4. The Chief Manager,
State Bank of India, Centralized Pension Processing
Centre, 5th Floor, Premises No.T-651 & T-751,
I.T.C. Belapur, CBD Belapur Railway Station
Complex, Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra ..Respondents
……
Shri. Sujeet D. Joshi, Advocate for the Petitioner
Shri. Nandkishor U. Yadav, Advocate for Respondent No.1
Shri. S. R. Wakale, AGP for Respondent Nos.2 & 3
……
2 WP4687/2023
CORAM : NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI
AND
ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, JJ.
Reserved on : SEPTEMBER 03, 2026
Pronounced on : OCTOBER 05, 2026
JUDGMENT (PER: ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, J.) :-
. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. With consent of the
parties, the Writ Petition is heard finally at the stage of admission.
2. By this Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, the Petitioner has put forth the following prayers:
“B) By issue of writ of mandamus or any other appropriate
writ, order, or direction, the respondent No.1 may kindly be
directed to release the arrears of family pension (w.e.f.
February 2019 to January, 2023) against the PPO
No.MHAFF0426616 (of late Rangrao Amrutrao Deshpande)
and deposit the same in Pension A/c No.52071766588 (held
by Late Lata Rangrao Deshpande) with State Bank of India,
within a period of eight weeks.
C) By issue of writ of mandamus or any other appropriate
writ or direction in the like nature, the respondent No. 4 may
kindly be directed to permit the present petitioner to
withdraw the arrears of pension deposited by the office of
respondent No.1.”
3. It is the case of the Petitioner that, his father and husband of late
Smt. Lata Rangrao Deshpande was the recipient of the Freedom Fighters
Pension from the State and Central Government since he had
participated in the freedom struggle movement. His father expired on
3 WP4687/2023
28.01.2019. The father of the Petitioner was having two (2) wives viz.
Pramila Deshpande and Lata Rangrao Deshpande. Pramila was the first
wife. The legal heirs of the deceased freedom fighter applied for
Heirship Certificate and the learned Civil Judge Junior Division,
Parli-Vaijnath issued Heirship Certificate in their favour on 20.05.2019.
First wife - Pramila expired on 15.06.2019. Even if she was nominee for
receiving the family pension, she never claimed the same at any point of
time.
4. It is further case of the Petitioner that, on 27.09.2021 in place of
Pramila, name of the Petitioner’s mother Lata was substituted as a
nominee to receive family pension to the dependents of freedom fighter.
She made an application to the office of Respondent No.1 for receiving
the family pension. The Respondent No.1 called her upon along with
the Petitioner to submit the requisite documents. The Petitioner on
behalf of his mother complied with all the requisite documents as were
directed to be complied with by Respondent No.1. Despite compliance of
the requisite documents, the family pension to the dependents of
freedom fighter was not paid to his mother. He made representation to
the Respondent No.1 on 11.08.2022 thereby requesting the grant of
Freedom Fighters Pension. Unfortunately, the mother of the Petitioner
expired on 02.02.2023. The Petitioner, therefore, is before this Court
being legal heir of mother Lata Rangrao Despande, seeking arrears of
family pension to the dependents of freedom fighter for the period from
4 WP4687/2023
February-2019 to January-2023.
5. We have heard the learned Counsel for the Petitioner and the
learned Counsel for Respondent No.1 and with their assistance, perused
the record.
6. Indisputably, deceased Rangrao had two (2) wives. The names of
both wives were mentioned in the original Pension Payment Order. The
first wife never applied for family pension during her lifetime. However,
in the sanction letter issued by Respondent No.1 on 03.09.2004, only
the name of the first wife was mentioned. Merely because the name of
the second wife i.e. the mother of the Petitioner, appears in the claim
application and not in the identification documents, the Respondents
have denied family pension to the dependent of the freedom fighter i.e.
the mother of the Petitioner. The Respondents have admitted this fact in
their Affidavit-in-reply. We thus find that, the Respondents have taken a
hyper technical approach leading to frustrate the very object of
providing the family pension to the dependents of freedom fighters. In
this view of the matter and in peculiar facts and circumstances of the
case, as none on behalf of first wife has claimed family pension, the
Petitioner being legal heir of second wife of deceased Rangrao, he is
entitled to the family pension to the dependent of freedom fighter. We
are, therefore, inclined to allow this Writ Petition. In the result, we pass
the following order.
5 WP4687/2023
ORDER
(A) The Writ Petition is allowed in terms of prayer clauses ‘B’ and
‘C’.
(B) Rule is, thus, made absolute in the above terms.
( ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, J. ) ( NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI, J. )
GGP
Checking your session…