A.B. Chaudhari, J.

1. Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of learned counsel for the petitioners. By the present petition, the petitioner-Indian Railways have put to challenge the judgment and order dated 28-1-2014 passed by Central Administrative Tribunal, Circuit Bench, Nagpur, in O.A. No. 2094/2006, which made an order for grant of pension to the two widows of the deceased railway employee in equal share. In support of the writ petition, Mr. Lambat, learned counsel for the petitioners, submitted that the tribunal committed error in making the impugned order particularly when the marriage of the second wife/widow of the deceased railway employee was clearly illegal and in violation of section 11 of the Hindu Marriage Act being the second marriage during the lifetime of the first wife, who was not divorced. He, therefore, submitted that in the wake of void marriage of the second wife/widow, the tribunal could not have made an order, contrary to the law. He, therefore, submitted that the impugned judgment and order deserves to be set aside.

2. None appears for the respondent, though served.

3. We have perused the impugned order made by the tribunal. We qu