Read Time: 06 minutes

Synopsis

The Bombay High Court recently expressed its discontent with the delay exhibited by the State Government in extending rightful benefits to the widow of the late Major Anuj Sood. Major Sood sacrificed his life on May 2, 2020, while rescuing civilian hostages from terrorist hideouts.

The bench of Justice GS Kulkarni and Justice Firdosh P Pooniwalla held, “When we say so, we are conscious of the fact that State Government certainly can take lightning decisions on several issues and as compared to such decision, present issue is a small but a needy issue touching the family of a martyr and that too, for the highest functionary of the State of Maharashtra”. 

A petition was filed by Aakriti Singh Sood, the widow of the late Major Anuj Sood, seeking ex-servicemen benefits from the Maharashtra State Government. Major Anuj Sood, aged 30, had sacrificed his life on May 2, 2020, while rescuing civilian hostages from terrorist hideouts. He was posthumously honored with the "Shaurya Chakra" by the President of India, effective from April 29, 2020.

Mrs. Sood pursued benefits after the State Government initially denied them, citing Major Sood's non-Maharashtrian origins and migration to Maharashtra. She argued that the family had been residing in Maharashtra for the past 15 years, fulfilling her late husband's desire. Senior Advocate Ashutosh A. Kumbhakoni, representing Mrs. Sood, asserted entitlement to a monthly allowance due to Major Sood's Shaurya Chakra recognition, highlighting the extraordinary circumstances of the case.

The court, recognizing the uniqueness of the situation, instructed the state government to evaluate Mrs. Sood's plea as a special case. On March 14, 2024, the court issued a detailed order directing the Chief Minister to consider the distinct circumstances involved, emphasizing the petitioner's special situation. It referred to a government policy from October 4, 2000, and clarified that the election code of conduct should not impede decision-making, as per a prior court order.

However, Assistant Government Pleader PJ Gavhane, representing the State, informed the court about a letter from the Assistant Secretary of the General Administration Department, explaining the delay in decision-making. The court acknowledged the letter, designated as 'X' for identification, which indicated the State Government's earnest consideration of the matter. However, the court expressed disagreement with the rationale for the delay, as outlined in the letter, which sought a lengthy adjournment due to purported administrative issues involving higher officials.

In response, the court highlighted the State Government's capacity to promptly address various matters. It emphasized the significance of Mrs. Sood's case, given its connection to the family of a martyr and the involvement of the highest authority in Maharashtra. 

“The concerned department and the higher officers of the State Government need to be alive to the cause being pursued by the petitioner and in the light of the orders passed by us, put up the file before the Hon’ble Chief Minister for his decision at the earliest”, the court expressed. 

The court directed compliance with its order and granted the request of the AGP to facilitate the Chief Minister's decision-making process in line with its directive issued on March 14, 2024.

Case Title: Aakriti Singh Sood v The State Of Maharashtra & Ors. (WP no 3661/2024)