SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
JYOTSNA REWAL DUA, J.
Durgi Devi W/o Late Bhola Ram - Petitioner
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh, Through Secretary (Home) to The Government of Himachal Pradesh, Shimla-2. – Respondent
Civil Writ Petition No.1657 of 2016
Decided On : 05-08-2022

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioners:Mr. Sanjeev Bhushan, Senior Advocate With Mr. Rajesh Kumar, ADVOCATE
For the Respondents:MR. Narender Singh Thakur, Deputy Advocate General with Mr. Ram Lal Thakur, Assistant Advocate, General, for R-1 and R-2, Mr. Lokinder Pal Thakur, Senior Penal Counsel for R-3)

Point of Law: On death of legally wedded wife, who is not survived by any child eligible to receive pension, share of family pension to her stream would not lapse, but would be payable to eligible children from other wedlock (other stream) in full i.e. 100%.

Headnote:

CCS Pension Rules - Rule 54 and 54(7)(b) and (c) - Pension Rules, 1972 - Rule 54(8) – Claiming Family pension – Second Wife - Petitioner’s claim is that she is second wife of deceased, so she is entitled to family pension, more so, after death of his first wife, who was recipient of the family pension - Petitioner was lawfully married to deceased. She gave birth to his children. So, she is entitled for family pension after deceased first wife passed away. Inviting attention to Rule 54 of CCS Pension Rules, learned Senior Counsel asserted that law envisages a situation where pension is payable to more than one wife - If children from other wedlock become ineligible to receive pension, their share of the family pension would not lapse but would be payable to legally wedded wife and her children as case may be in full i.e. 100%. (Para 5)

Finding of the court: Government of India vide O.M. had clarified that pensionary benefits will be granted to the children of a deceased government servant from void or voidable marriages as per their turn in accordance with Rule 54(8) of Pension Rules, 1972. It was also clarified that such children will have no claim whatsoever to receive family pension as long as legally wedded wife is the recipient of the same.

Result: Writ petition dismissed.

ORDER :

1. Petitioner’s claim is that she is second wife of deceased Bhola Ram, so she is entitled to family pension, more so, after the death of his first wife, who was recipient of the family pension.

2. The facts as submitted by learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner are that:-

2(i) The petitioner got married to Bhola Ram in the year 1964. The marriage was solemnized as per customs and rituals prevailing in the area. Six children were born from this wedlock. Petitioner was not aware at the time of her marriage that Bhola Ram was already married and had a wife. She became aware of this fact much later.

2(ii) Bhola Ram superannuated in the year 1983. He died on 17.01.2002. Bhola Ram had nominated the petitioner in the official record for the purpose of family pension. However, claim for family pension was put forth by his first wife-Smt. Ramku Devi. The respondents conducted inquiry in the matter and came to the conclusion that Smt. Ramku Devi was the first and legally wedded wife of late Bhola Ram. On this basis, family pension was sanctioned and paid to Smt. Ramku Devi.

2(iii) The petitioner challenged the decision of the respondents in declining her the family pension by filing Civil Writ Petition No. 7571 of 2010 in this Court. The writ petition was dismissed on 27.07.2011.

2(iv) The petitioner’s present claim is that Bhola Ram’s first wife Smt. Ramku Devi has also died on 01.08.2015, hence, no other claimant qua family pension survives, but for the petitioner and her children. On such basis, she has now stacked her claim on family pension w.e.f. August 2015.

3. The arguments of learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner are that the petitioner was lawfully married to Bhola Ram. She gave birth to his children. So, she is entitled for family pension after Bhola Ram’s first wife passed away. Inviting attention to Rule 54 of CCS Pension Rules, learned Senior Counsel asserted that law envisages a situation where pension is payable to more than one wife. Learned Senior Counsel also placed reliance upon judgment of Madras High Court, dated 23.01.2020, titled C.Sarojini Devi Vs. The Director of Local Fund Audits and others, WP No.34592 of 2019, wherein, the decision of the official respondents in rejecting the proposal for family pension to the petitioner (therein) on the sole ground that when the petitioner married the deceased government servant, the marriage between the government servant and his first wife was subsisting, was held to be incorrect. The second wife was held entitled to the family pension.

The argument of learned Deputy Advocate General was that the petitioner had already invoked extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court for the same relief as claimed herein. Having lost in her earlier Civil Writ Petition No.7571 of 2010, it is not open for the petitioner to agitate the same issue once again. The prayer was made for dismissing the writ petition.

4. Observations:

4(i). Rule Position.

4(i)(a). Rule 54 of CCS Pension Rules, 1972 pertains to family pension. Sub Rule (7) thereof talks about the situation where family pension is payable to more than one widow of the deceased. Rule 54(7) is extracted hereinafter:

    “(7) (a) (i) Where the family pension is payable to more widows than one, the family pension shall be paid to the widows in equal shares.

(ii) On the death of a widow, her share of the family pension shall become payable to her eligible child:

Provided that if the widow is not survived by any child, her share of the family pension shall not lapse but shall be payable to the other widows in equal shares, or if there is only one such other widow, in full, to her.

(b) Where the deceased Government servant or pensioner is survived by a widow but has left behind eligible child or children from another wife who is not alive, the eligible child or children shall be entitled to the share of family pension which the mother would have received if she had been alive at the time of the death of the Government servant or pension

        Click Here to Read the rest of this document
        1
        2
        3
        4
        5
        6
        7
        8
        9
        10
        11
        SupremeToday Portrait Ad
        supreme today icon
        logo-black

        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

        qr

        Scan Me!

        India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

        For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

        whatsapp-icon Back to top