The significance of nomination in determining entitlement to family pension and the need for evidence to establish legal rights in disputed cases.

JUDGMENT :

Heard Mr. Ajay Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, Mr. Kishore Kumar Thakur, learned counsel, duly assisted by Mr. Kumar Chandra Shekhar, learned counsel for respondent no.9, Mr. Sita Ram Yadav, learned counsel for the State and also perused the materials available on record meticulously.

2. The petitioner is claiming herself to be wife of deceased Pradeep Mistri, who superannuated on 28.02.2010 while working as Helper in the Minor Irrigation Division, Patna and died on 02.05.2013, filed the present writ application seeking direction to the respondents to grant her full family pension and also assailed the letter dated 28.03.2016, issued by the Treasury Officer, Patna (Collectorate) by which it has been informed that since the name of Sona Devi mentioned as wife of Pradeep Mistri in the pension paper of the deceased employee, the family pension is being paid to her after making deduction of Rs.4,000/-from the payment of Sona Devi. She further prayed, inter alia, for a direction upon the respondents to sanction the due 3rd ACP to her husband w.e.f. 01.01.2009 with all consequential benefits, apart from due GPF for the period the deceased employee had worked under the Work Charge Establishment. It is also prayed that petitioner being first wife of the employee is entitled to receive 100% family pension in view of ratio laid down by this Court in Most. Tara Devi Vs. The State of Bihar and Others (C.W.J.C. No. 15986 of 2016).

3. It is vehemently contended that the marriage of the petitioner was solemnized with late Pradeep Mistri on 27.06.1986, as per the Hindu rituals and from their wedlock five children were born. Both the husband and the wife remained together for a pretty long time. However, subsequently, petitioner’s husband became habitual drunkard due to which he came in contact with a married woman, namely, Sona Devi @ Sunaina Devi, the respondent no.9 herein. After some time, the petitioner’s husband left taking care of the petitioner and the children, which resulted into filing of Maintenance Case No. 211(M) of 2008 against the deceased employee before the learned Family Court, Patna, which was allowed by the learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Patna and after considering the income of the husband of the petitioner, a sum of Rs.4,000/-per month was allowed for maintenance of the petitioner and her children from the date of order, the copy of which has been brought on record by way of Annexure-4 to the writ application.

4. In support of the contention of the petitioner being legally married wife to the deceased Pradeep Mistri, the copies of certificates issued by School in favour of her children were brought on record. It has also been submitted that respondent no.9 is wife of Sri Sapan Kumar Chatterjee, which fact would be evident from the Municipal Tax receipts, wherein the name of the husband of respondent no. 9 was entered in Municipal record as Sapan Kumar Chatterjee. He also submits that even during the life time the deceased employee had written a letter to the respondent Executive Engineer on 28.07.1999 admitting the fact that he has been living with his wife and children and Sunaina Devi is the wife of Sapan Kumar Chatterjee, the copy of which has also been annexed to the writ application. It is also contended that after the retirement of the deceased employee, retiral benefits, including the pension, gratuity and other dues were paid to him, though after delay of two years. However, the respondent no.9 in connivance with respondent Executive Engineer, Minor Irrigation Department got her name approved as wife of deceased Pradeep Mistri and the family pension was sanctioned in her favour on the basis of the pension paper, which fraudulently shows the name of respondent no.9, as his wife. Similar fraud has also been committed in GPF book wherein the name of respondent no.9 has mentioned as wife of the deceased employee. Various documents and papers have been placed bef