IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
NELSON SAILO, J.
Rohlupuii – Petitioner
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
WP (C) No. 96 of 2022
Decided On : 13-08-2024
Pension - Family Pension and DCRG - CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 - The Court interpreted the provisions of the CCS (Pension) Rules, particularly Rules 50, 53, and 54, to determine the eligibility of the petitioners for Family Pension and DCRG, emphasizing the validity of nominations made by the deceased.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners, claiming to be the family of the deceased, sought Family Pension and DCRG after the death of their husband and father, who had served in both the Assam Rifles and Doordarshan Kendra. The first wife was receiving Family Pension from the Assam Rifles, leading to a dispute over the petitioners' claims.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found that the deceased had nominated the petitioners for DCRG and declared them as family members in his service records. The Court ruled that the petitioners were entitled to Family Pension and DCRG based on these nominations and the applicable rules.
Issues: Whether the petitioners are entitled to receive Family Pension and DCRG for the services rendered by the deceased under Doordarshan Kendra, given the existence of a legally wedded wife.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court held that the nominations made by the deceased in his service records were valid and should be honored, allowing the petitioners to receive the benefits despite the existence of the first wife.
Result: The impugned decision was set aside, and the respondents were directed to grant Family Pension and DCRG to the petitioners.
JUDGMENT :
NELSON SAILO, J.
1. Heard Mr. Lalchhanliana Khiangte, learned counsel for the petitioners and Ms. Zairemsangpuii, learned CGC for the respondent Nos. 1 to 5. None appears for the respondent No. 6 despite notice.
2. Brief facts essential for disposal of the instant writ petition is that the petitioner No. 1 is the wife of late Dal Bahadur and the petitioner Nos. 2 & 3 are the son and daughter born out of the marriage between the petitioner No. 1 and late Dal Bahadur. According to the petitioner No. 1, although their marriage was not officially solemnized, but the bride’s price was paid on 12.04.1982 as per local custom. They lived together as husband and wife and the petitioner Nos. 2 & 3 were born to them. Later, after late Dal Bahadur joined Doordarshan Kendra, Aizawl as a Security Guard, a Marriage Certificate was belatedly issued to them by Lt. R. Rotluanga of the Salvation Army, which is a denomination of the Christian Church.
3. Late Dal Bahadur initially was serving in the Assam Rifles as a Rifleman since 10.05.1965 and he was discharged on voluntary retirement from the Assam Rifles on 31.01.1988. Thereafter, on 03.05.1993, he was appointed as a Security Guard in the Doordarshan Kendra, Aizawl. Subsequently, Sh. Dal Bahadur expired on 02.09.1999.
4. It is the case of the petitioners that late Dal Bahadur during his lifetime while serving at Doordarshan Kendra, Aizawl got the names of the petitioners recorded in his Service Book as per Form-3. Also as per Form-1, he had nominated the petitioner No. 1 to receive 30% of the Death-cum-Retirement Gratuity (DCRG) and 35% each to the petitioner Nos. 2 & 3. The nomination and entries were duly countersigned by him as well.
5. After the death of Sh. Dal Bahadur on 02.09.1999, the petitioner No. 1 approached the authorities of Doordarshan Kendra, Aizawl for payment of Family Pension and other benefits of her late husband. The respondent No. 4 in the course of processing the application submitted by the petitioner No. 1 was informed by the Record Officer of the Directorate General of Assam Rifles vide Communication dated 26.07.2001 that late Dal Bahadur of 26th Assam Rifles voluntarily retired from service on 31.01.1988 and he was granted pension @ Rs. 438/- per month and Family Pension was also sanctioned in advance to his wife Smt. Bahaduri Kala payable in the event of the death of the pensioner. It was also stated in the Communication that the name of the petitioner No. 1 was not recorded in the Service Record of the pensioner as his wife and hence, no family pension was sanctioned in her favor.
6. Thereafter, the petitioner No. 1 received information from the Pay & Accounts Office of the Information & Broadcasting Ministry, Govt. of India through Communication dated 10.05.2002 to the effect that no Civil Family Pension can be sanctioned for the service in Civil Department as per paragraph No. 13(B) of Rule 54 (CCS) since the family pension of late Dal Bahadur from Defence Department had already been sanctioned to his wife i.e. the respondent No. 6 and that the nomination in favor of the second wife is void if the first wife is alive. Further, the Record Officer of the Directorate General of Assam Rifles vide his Communication dated 29.12.2003 also informed Doordarshan Kendra, Aizawl that the second wife is not entitled to the family pension as per Sub-Rule - 14 of Rule 54 of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972. Drawing & Disbursing Officer of Doordarshan Kendra, Aizawl vide letter dated 08.01.2007 had also requested the Directorate General, Assam Rifles, Record Branch (NE-II) to settle the DCRG of late Dal Bahadur in view of the persistent demand by the petitioner No. 1.
7. Although the petitioner No. 1 had received the General Provident Fund (GPF) and Leave Encashment of late Dal Bahadur but the Family Pension and DCRG for the services rendered under the Doordarshan Kendra, Aizawl was not paid to the petitioners who are the only nominees of late Dal Bahadur in the Service Records
AI
The Court established that valid nominations in service records must be honored, allowing dual pensions under specific conditions as per government policy.
Children from alleged invalid marriages cannot claim pensionary benefits, and compassionate appointments require eligibility criteria fulfillment.
The entitlement of a divorced daughter to a share of the family pension under the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972 and relevant office memorandums.
Second marriage void without divorce from first spouse; benefits follow nomination and service records absent civil court declaration.
A mother who has remarried is not entitled to family pension benefits as per Regulation 70 of Pension Regulations, 2008, which prioritizes the father when a son has nominated him as the pension benef....
The denial of family pension based on unreasonable deductions of service years violates legal principles of fairness; unmarried dependent daughters are entitled to pension as per amended Rule 143.
Family pension payable to eligible unmarried children in birth order post-pensioner’s death per CCS (Pension) Rules 2021 Rule 50(9); administrative delays in settlement despite representations entitl....
The main legal point established is that a service-related disability leading to premature discharge entitles the petitioner to family pension under the Central Civil Services (Extraordinary Pension)....
The legal point established is the entitlement of the legally wedded spouse to pensionary benefits under the applicable rules and the invalidity of nominations contrary to statutory provisions.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.