Back
THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR, J
Sabita Roy W/o- Lt. Moni Kanta Roy - Appellant
Versus
The State Of Assam And 8 Ors. - Respondent
WP(C) 5813 / 2021
Decided On : 21-01-2025
(A) Assam Services (Pension) Rules, 1969 - Rule 143 - Family pension - The petitioner sought family pension and benefits after the death of her husband, who died in service. The authorities denied the claim based on a presumption of remarriage, which was contested by the petitioner. The court ruled that in the absence of credible evidence of remarriage, the petitioner is entitled to the family pension. (Paras 8 - 20 )
(B) Maintenance - The petitioner had previously received maintenance from her husband, which underscores her marital status and entitlement to benefits. (Paras 5 , 15 )
(C) Procedural fairness - The court emphasized the need for proper processing of the pension proposal by the authorities without undue delay. (Paras 21 - 24 )
Facts of the case:
The petitioner's husband died in harness, and she sought family pension, which was denied based on allegations of remarriage.
Findings of Court:
The court found no credible evidence of remarriage and confirmed the petitioner's entitlement to family pension.
Issues: Whether the petitioner had remarried and whether she is entitled to family pension.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that without a court order of divorce, the petitioner remains the legal wife and is entitled to benefits under the pension rules.
Result: The respondents were directed to process the pension proposal for the petitioner.
JUDGMENT :
N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR, J.
1. Heard Mr. P, Mahanta, learned Counsel for the petitioner. Also Heard Mr. C. Sarma, learned Standing Counsel Dima Hasao Autonomous Council, Mr. P. Nayak, learned Standing Counsel Finance Department and Mr. R. K. Talukdar, learned Standing Counsel Accountant General (Assam), appears for the Respondent No. 4.
2. The petitioner by way of instituting the present proceeding has prayed for a direction upon the respondent authorities to release to her the family pension other pensionary benefits due to her on account of the services rendered by her deceased husband.
3. Brief facts, requisite for adjudication of the issues arising in the present proceeding, is noticed as under :
4. The husband of the petitioner was initially engaged as a Muster Roll worker in the establishment of the Assistant Executive Engineer, PWD (R&B), Lumding Sub-Division w.e.f. 01.12.1991.
5. His services were thereafter regularized w.e.f. 22.07.2005. On account of certain differences arising between the petitioner and her husband, the petitioner had instituted proceedings under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, before the Court of the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Hojai, praying for grant of maintenance. The learned Court vide orders passed in the matter had granted maintenance to the petitioner and the same was being paid by the husband of the petitioner. Unfortunately, on 15.12.2019, the husband of the petitioner died in harness.
6. The petitioner thereafter, approached the respondent authorities praying for releasing to her family pension and other pensionary benefits due to her on account of the services rendered by her deceased husband.
7. The prayers made by the petitioner before the respondent authorities for being authorized the family pension and other pensioner benefits not having been considered, the petitioner has instituted the present proceedings.
8. Mr. P. Mahanta, learned Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner being the legally married wife of Late Mani Kanta Roy, she is entitled to receive family pension in pursuance to the death of her husband in terms of the provisions of Rule 143, of the Assam Services (Pension) Rules, 1969. However, the respondent authorities have not released the same to the petitioner.
9. Mr. Mahanta, learned Counsel for the petitioner, by referring to the stand taken by the respondent authorities more particularly the Respondent No. 8, in an affidavit filed in the present proceeding, has contended that the pension and pensionary benefits due to the petitioner, on account of the services rendered by her husband, were being not processed by the respondent authorities only on the ground that it was presumed that the petitioner had remarried one Mukesh Chetri, on 27.07.2002. The said contention is stated to have been so made basing on a letter purportedly written by the father of the petitioner to the learned District Judicial Magistrate, Sankar Nagar Hojai, wherein the said fact was so disclosed. Mr. Mahanta, learned Counsel for the petitioner by referring to the affidavit in reply filed in the matter by the petitioner has contended that the said position is clearly perverse, inasmuch as, the father of the petitioner had sworn an affidavit and therein, has stated that the husband of the petitioner had taken his thumb impression on a blank paper over a revenue stamp and the said letter was stated to have been so written, utilizing the said blank paper, wherein his signature was so obtained.
10. It was further contended by Mr. Mahanta, learned Counsel for the petitioner, that the father of the petitioner in the said affidavit has stated that the letter purportedly stated to have been issued by him and relied upon by the respondent authorities for denying to the petitioner herein, her due pension and pensionary benefits was not written by him and the contents thereof are fa
In the absence of credible evidence of remarriage, a legally married spouse is entitled to family pension and benefits under the Assam Services Pension Rules.
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.
The eldest surviving widow is entitled to family pension as a trustee for all entitled parties, ensuring equitable distribution per the agreement between the wives.
Divorced daughters are entitled to family pension similar to unmarried daughters, emphasizing dependency and socio-economic justice rather than strict adherence to employment status.
The validity of a marriage under the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules and Section 5(i) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, and its impact on entitlement to family pension.
Family pension - Legally married wife is liable for pension - Liability of First wife to get pension - Petitioner is legally married wife of deceased and they have three sons out of their wedlock and....
Under the provisions of Rule 140 of the Assam Services (Pension) Rules, 1969, the petitioner would be entitled to family pension on his death.
In the absence of any special Rules to the contrary, the nominations referred to under Rule 143 of the Assam (Services) Pension Rules, 1969 will be applicable.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
