The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's emphasis on achieving social justice and balancing the equities between the first and second wives in the dispute over family pension and service benefits.

JUDGMENT :

Ravi Nath Tilhari, J.

Heard Sri Sreemannarayana Vattikuti, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Govt. Pleader for Services-II, appearing for respondents Nos.1 to 4 and Sri Satish Kumar, learned counsel for the 5th respondent.

2. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order of the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal (in short "APAT/Tribunal") in O.A.No.1726 of 2015, dtd. 25/4/2017.

3. The case of the petitioner is that her husband Sri late Gaddam Danam worked as Warden in the Office of the District Social Welfare-3rd respondent and retired on 30/6/2011 and later expired on 17/10/2014 leaving behind the petitioner (Gaddam Ruth Victoria) as his legally wedded wife and only son as his legal heirs. The petitioner approached the official respondents No.1 to 4 claiming the retirement and other terminal benefits, such as pension, medical reimbursement etc., and came to know that the present 5th respondent, namely, Smt. G. Padma, was also claiming family pension etc., being nominee of late Gaddam Danam in his service register. The petitioner's further case is that her marriage with late Gaddam Danam took place on 9/6/1975 as per Christian rites and customs. Out of the said wedlock, a son was born. The petitioner's husband never married any other woman. The petitioner was neglected in maintenance. So, she filed FCOP No.151 of 2010 against her husband and pending such case, he retired from service. Then the petitioner filed FCOP No.232 of 2011 to attach an amount of Rs.3,60,000.00 on which a conditional order of attachment in I.A.No.1197 of 2011 in FCOP No.232 of 2011 was passed on 8/9/2011, against which, the husband filed CRP No.1024 of 2012, which was allowed on 4/12/2012, remanding the matter to the trial Court for fresh consideraton, but with direction that the said amount shall be withheld till the matter was decided by the trial Court, subject to Sec. 60(g) of Code of Civil Procedure (CPC).

4. Late Gaddam Danam had filed FCOP No.228 of 2011 in the Family Court, Nellore seeking divorce against the petitioner and during its pendency, he died on 17/10/2014, resulting into the dismissal of the divorce case. Even in divorce petition, any marriage with 5th respondent was not mentioned. The petitioner's case therefore is that her marriage with late Gaddam Danam was subsisting till his death and she was the only legally wedded wife and only widow entitled to receive all the service benefits on the death of her husband. The 5th respondent was not entitled for any such benefit also because in the personal law of the parties any second marriage during the continuance of the first marriage is not permissible. The petitioner"s husband also never obtained any permission from the competent authority in the service department, for the alleged second marriage with the 5th respondent at any time as per the Andhra Pradesh Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1964, so the so called second marriage is null and void and the 5th respondent did not acquire any status of wife.

5. On the aforesaid averments, inter alia, the petitioner initially filed W.P.No.3692 of 2015, for releasing the family pension and other related benefits consequent to the death of Gaddam Danam, which was dismissed on 9/3/2015, holding that the service matters have to be got resolved at the first instance by Tribunal and thereafter only a judicial review can be exercised. Liberty was granted to the petitioner to approach the Tribunal.

6. Thereafter, the petitioner filed O.A.No.1728 of 2015 before the APAT questioning the inaction of the official respondents No.1 to 4, with direction to release the pending and all other benefits and amounts payable to the petitioner due to death of her husband Gaddam Danam.

7. The petitioner"s claim was contested by the official respondents by filing counter that they have informed the Accountant General Officer vide Lr.Rc.No.A4/595/2005, dtd. 8/12/2015 with regard t