Martyr Major's widow did not get benefits under ex-serviceman policy, High Court reprimands Maharashtra government
High Court: The High Court said that 'you (state government) are giving some reason or the other every time. This is a case in which someone sacrificed his life for the country and you are doing the same. We are not happy with this.
The wife of a martyred Major of the Indian Army has not received any facility under the ex-serviceman policy even after many years, on which the Bombay High Court has expressed displeasure. The division bench of the High Court comprising Justice Girish Kulkarni and Justice Firdosh Pooniwala, while hearing the petition of Aakriti Sood, also reprimanded the Maharashtra government.
On May 2, 2020, Indian Army Major Anuj Sood was martyred during a confrontation with terrorists in Handwara, Jammu and Kashmir. The Shaurya Chakra was given to Major Sood posthumously. The Maharashtra government was ordered to provide facilities under the ex-serviceman policy by Aakriti Sood, the widow of Major Sood, in a High Court petition. According to the Maharashtra government, the only individuals qualified for benefits under the ex-serviceman policy are those who were either born in Maharashtra or have lived there for a period of 15 years. Major Sood was not a Maharashtra resident, the state government declared on Friday. Major Anuj Sood had been residing in the state for the previous fifteen years, according to Aakriti Sood's petition.
PP Kakade, appearing for the government, told the bench that we will have to take a policy decision in this matter and for this, the approval of the cabinet will be required, but the cabinet meeting is not being held right now. On this, the bench expressed displeasure and said, 'You are giving some reason or the other every time. This is a case in which someone sacrificed his life for the country and you are doing the same. We are not happy with this.
The bench said that 'since this is a special case, we had also asked the highest authority of the state (Chief Minister) to consider this matter on priority and take an appropriate decision. He should have decided on this. If they have not decided then let us know then we will look into the matter and decide what to do. The High Court has directed the state government to file the affidavit by April 17. The court has said that 'after this, they will deal with the matter in their way.'
