V. Ramasubramanian, J.

Aggrieved by a direction issued by the learned Single Judge in a writ petition filed by the respondent, to pay family pension to the respondent, at least from the date of the death of the first wife, the Union of India has come up with the above writ appeal.

2. Heard Mr. B. Krishna Mohan, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the appellant and Mr. T. Deena Dayal, General Power of Attorney holder of the respondent appearing in-person.

3. The respondent filed a writ petition in W.P.No.27522 of 2016 seeking a direction to the Union of India to sanction to her, the family pension payable on account of the death of her husband, contending inter alia that she was married to the deceased Government Servant on 18.04.1983; that she lived with him as his wife till his death on 18.12.1997 and also had three sons born in the relationship; that she submitted a petition on 28.03.2000, to the Minister for Consumer Affairs seeking family pension, not only for herself but also for her three minor children; that however no order was passed, presumably at the intervention of another lady (impleaded as the 3rd respondent in the main writ petition), the alleged first wife of the husband of the respondent; that the marriage claimed by the 3rd respondent in the writ petition was void under Section 5 (ii) (b) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, due to her incapacity to have cohabitation and to bear children; that she filed one writ petition in W.P.No.22212 of 2000 on the file of this Court, in which a direction was issued on 03.07.2001 to the authorities to dispose of the representation of the respondent on merits; that in the said order, an observation was also made by this Court that this Court cannot go into the details of the marriage of the respondent herein; that challenging the observation so made, the respondent filed an appeal in W.A.No.2266 of 2003 and the same was disposed of by a Bench of this Court on 04.12.2003 permitting the respondent to give a fresh representation and with a further direction to the Government to take action on the representation within four months; that however there was no post of Regional Director in Department of Food, to enable the respondent to give a representation as per the directions of the Division Bench; that therefore the respondent filed a fresh writ petition in W.P.No.25865 of 2005; that the said writ petition was disposed of by a learned Judge, by an order dated 24.06.2013 directing the Secretaries in the Ministry of Consumer Affairs and in the Department of Pension to conduct a de novo enquiry into the matter, after affording reasonable opportunity both to the 1st respondent herein and to the person who claimed to be the first wife and to take further action depending upon the outcome of the enquiry; that thereafter an order was passed by the then Secretary to Government, Ministry of Consumer Affairs on 07.02.2014 rejecting the claim of the 1st respondent, on the ground that the 1st respondent is not the legally wedded wife of the deceased Government Servant; that thereafter the respondent submitted a petition to the Honble the Chief Justice of this Court on 19.10.2014, requesting the Chief Justice to treat her letter as a writ petition to take appropriate action; that the said letter was forwarded to the High Court Legal Services Committee; that the Secretary of the High Court Legal Services Committee opined that the respondent should approach the Ministry of Consumer Affairs; that thereafter the respondent filed a Contempt Case, but the same was closed by a learned Judge of this Court, with liberty to the respondent to challenge the order dated 07.02.2014 by way of a separate writ petition and that therefore the respondent was obliged to file the present writ petition W.P.No.27522 of 2016 out of which the present writ appeal arises.

4. Before proceeding further, we are obliged to take note of two things, viz., (1) that the person, who claimed to be the first wife, who was