CRM-M-1612-2018 (1) [207] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-1612-2018 DECIDED ON: 26.08.2025 SURINDER KUMAR .....PETITIONER VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER .....RESPONDENTS CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MOUDGIL Present: Mr. Avijit Singh, Advocate for Mr. Rahul Bhargava, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Gehna Vaishnavi, Advocate for respondents No.1 and 2. SANDEEP MOUDGIL, J (ORAL) 1. The jurisdiction of this Court has been invoked under article 226/227 of the Constitution of India with a prayer that this Hon'ble Court may issue a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the Letter dated 15.05.2017 (Annexure P-3), whereby, the request of the petitioner for correction in the name of his wife in his service record as nominee of the petitioner has been rejected. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has contended that the impugned order dated 15.05.2017 (Annexure P-3) has been passed erroneously without examining the documents placed on record in the form of Voter Id Card, copy of Passbook issued by the Punjab Gramin Bank dated 30.01.2016, which reflects the present petitioner as husband of Shama Rani, jointly holding the said bank account. The Aadhaar Card has also been placed on record as Annexure P-1, which bears the credentials of ‘Shama Rani’ as wife of the present petitioner-Surinder Kumar and the Voter Id Card also, which was issued way back in 19.11.2006, mentioned the name of her husband as Surinder Kumar. 3 It is asserted bu the petitioner that Sonia daughter of Sukhdev Ram and Shama Rani daughter of Sukhdev Ram, are not two distinct person but the same woman, who is the wife of the present petitioner, as it is stated on behalf of the petitioner, submitting that Shama Rani’s nickname is ‘Sonia’, but ANJAL GUPTA 2025.08.30 12:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-1612-2018 (2) in all official documents and certificates her name is depicted as ‘Shama Rani’. All these facts have been ignored by the authorities concerned while passing the impugned order. 4. Having perused the impugned order dated 15.05.2017 (Annexure P-3), this Court is of the considered view that the same is devoid of any merit having no reasons recorded therein which is cryptic and has been passed without application of judicious mind, as the documents in support whereof, placed by the petitioner have not been examined and considered. 5. In the light of the above, order 15.05.2017 (Annexure P-3) is hereby quashed and the Additional Controller of Defence Accounts, Jabalpur, Madya Pradesh, Ridge Road, Jabalpur, is directed to examine the case afresh in the light of the observations made hereinabove and justifying the fact qua the issuance of Voter ID Card, joint holding of the bank account, Pan Card, Aadhaar Card and also the photographs annexed of all these documents should also be matched with the person, to whom the petitioner is claiming to be his wife. The necessary order shall be passed within a period of 04 weeks from the date of a receipt of a certified copy of this order. 6. The present petition is disposed of accordingly. (SANDEEP MOUDGIL) 26.08.2025 JUDGE Anjal Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No ANJAL GUPTA 2025.08.30 12:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document