High CourtsSingle Bench

Sandeep Kaur And Another vs State Of Punjab And Others

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 19 November 2025 · Citation: (2025) 11 P&H CK 1989

HON’BLE JUDGES
Jagmohan Bansal, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Constitution Of India, 1950 — Article 226, 227
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Civil Writ Petition No. 33675 Of 2025
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

6 paragraphs · 172 words

Jagmohan Bansal, J

1.

The petitioners through instant petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India are seeking directions to respondents to release them family pension.

2.

Petitioner No.2 is minor son of petitioner No.1. They are claiming that they are entitled to family pension on account of death of Gaganpreet Singh i.e. husband of petitioner No.1. Gaganpreet Singh was working with Punjab Police Force as Constable. He died in a road accident on 08.02.2021. The petitioner is claiming family pension, however, respondent has informed her that she cannot be granted family pension because her mother-in-law is nominee in the service record of Gaganpreet Singh.

3.

Learned State counsel submits that there is dispute between the petitioner and mother of deceased employee. Both sides have lodged their

4.

The respondent cannot keep the matter pending for indefinite period. The matter relates to family pension and terminal dues, thus, respondent is hereby directed to resolve the matter by passing an order within two months from today.

5.

Disposed of in above terms.