The Bombay High Court expressed dissatisfaction with the Maharashtra government on Friday for its failure to decide on granting benefits to the widow of an Army major martyred in Jammu and Kashmir under its policy for ex-servicemen.
A bench comprising Justices Girish Kulkarni and Firdosh Pooniwalla stated they were “not happy” and “surprised” with the government’s stance despite court orders asking the chief minister to consider the matter as a “special case”.
The division bench was hearing was a petition filed by Aakriti Sood, the widow of late Major Anuj Sood, seeking monetary benefits for ex-servicemen under two government resolutions of 2019 and 2020.
Major Sood lost his life on May 2, 2020, while rescuing civilian hostages from terrorist hideouts in Jammu and Kashmir and was posthumously awarded the Shaurya Chakra.
The state government argued that only those born in Maharashtra or who lived in the state continuously for 15 years were eligible for monetary benefits and allowances. During the hearing, the government pleader P P Kakade informed the bench that benefits couldn’t be extended to Sood as he was not a “domicile” of the state.
Kakade stated, “We need to take a proper policy decision for which we need to approach the cabinet. The cabinet is not sitting now.”
However, the bench was unimpressed, stating that reasons are repeatedly given to avoid making a decision.
The court emphasized that it had directed the highest authority of the state, the chief minister, to consider the matter as a special case and make an appropriate decision.
Justice Kulkarni remarked, “You (government) are dealing with such a case…someone has sacrificed his life for the country and you are doing this. We are not happy.”
The court noted that it had orally directed the government to grant the benefit to Sood under the privilege policy.
The court directed the government to file an affidavit by April 17 and stated it would then address the issue accordingly.
In her plea, Aakriti Sood challenged the government’s communication on August 26, 2020, denying benefits, asserting that Sood was not born in Maharashtra or had resided in the state for 15 years. She contended that the family had been living in Maharashtra for the last 15 years as desired by her late husband, who always intended to live in Pune.
