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

2025 Supreme(All) 2786

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD SITTING AT LUCKNOW 
ATTAU RAHMAN MASOODI, SUBHASH VIDYARTHI, JJ.
Smt. Pin Maya Kumal - Petitioner
Versus
Govt. of India Thru. Secy. Ministry of Defence Army And Others - Respondents
Writ - A No. 12938 of 2024
Decided On : 03-01-2025


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Ashok Kumar Srivastava.
For the Respondent: A.S.G.I.

The court affirmed that a second marriage contracted without prior sanction under army regulations is void, thus denying pension benefits to the second wife.

Headnote:(A) Article 226 of the Constitution of India - Regulation 333 of Defense Service Regulations - Claim for ordinary family pension denied due to second marriage without prior sanction - Regulation 333 prohibits plural marriages without permission, rendering the second marriage void. (Paras 6, 16, 21)

(B) Marriage Legality - The court upheld that the first marriage was valid and the second was void as it contravened army regulations, thus denying the claim for pension. (Paras 12, 21)

(C) Precedent - The court distinguished previous rulings, affirming that the petitioner, as a second wife, is not entitled to pension benefits since the marriage was invalid under army regulations. (Paras 17, 21)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner, second wife of a deceased soldier, claimed family pension after his death. The Armed Forces Tribunal denied the claim based on the absence of her name in service records and the void status of the second marriage under army regulations.

Findings of Court:
The court found no illegality in the Tribunal's decision, affirming that the second marriage was void due to lack of permission.

Issues: The primary issues were the legality of the second marriage and the entitlement to family pension.

Ratio Decidendi: The court reasoned that the second marriage was void as it violated army regulations requiring prior sanction, thus denying the claim for pension benefits.

Result: Writ petition dismissed.

Table of Content
1. petitioner claims entitlement to family pension post husband's death. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5)
2. regulation 333 prohibits second marriage without sanction. (Para 6 , 7 , 8)
3. arguments regarding the legality of the first marriage and record maintenance. (Para 12 , 14 , 15)
4. previous judgments do not apply to current case regarding pension rights. (Para 17 , 18 , 19)
5. writ petition dismissed; no merit found in the petitioner's claim. (Para 21)

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Sri Ashok Kumar Srivastava, the learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri S.B. Pandey, the learned Senior Advocate/Deputy Solicitor General of India assisted by Sri Varun Pandey, the learned counsel for the opposite parties and perused the material available on record.

2. By means of the instant petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs: -

“(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari for quashing of impugned orders dated 20.11.2023 and 08 April 2024 passed by Armed Forces Tribunal (RB), Lucknow annexed as Annexure No. 1 & 2 respectively to this petition and thereby grant her entitled Ordinary Family Pension w.e.f. 14 Jul 2016 i.e., pursuant to death of her husband on 13 Jul 2016.

(ii) Issue/pass an order or direction of appropriate nature to summon and quash/set aside orders leading to denial of petitioner’s ordinary family pension w.e.f. 14.07.2016 i.e., after her husband’s death on 13.07.2016.

(iii) Issue/pass an order or direction of appropriate nature to opposite parties to grant ordinary family pension, LTA and ensuing benefits to the petitioner w.e.f 14.07.2016, i.e., after her husband’s death on 13 Jul.2016.

(iv) Issue a writ, order of direction in the nature of mandamus commanding respondent to pay the arrears of all dues and arrears of ordinary family pension from the due date till actual disbursement of aforesaid arrear along with the interest of 12%per annum.

(v) Issue a writ, order of direction which this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case in favour of the petitioner in the interest of justice.

(vi) Allow the writ petition with cost.”

3. Briefly stated, the facts of the case as pleaded on behalf of the petitioner are that the petitioner is the second wife of late Subedar Tek Bahadur Thapa (a Gorkha from Nepal). Late Tek Bahadur Thapa was enrolled in the Indian Army on 28.11.1961 and he was discharged from service with effect from 30.11.1989. He was paid pension till his death on 13.07.2016. The petitioner claims that she got married to late Tek Bahadur Thapa on 06.03.1969. After her marriage, the petitioner learnt that her husband was already married to Smt. Dalli Maya Kumal on 07.02.1953 and he had four daughters and a son out of that wedlock. At the time of death of Tek Bahadur Thapa, all five children from his first wife were above 25 years of age and married and they were not entitled to claim family pension. In the service record of late Tek Bahadur Thapa, the name of his wife is mentioned as Smt. Dalli Maya Kumal, but the photograph affixed shows the petitioner as wife of Late Tek Bahadur Thapa.

4. The petitioner made a claim for payment of family pension which was denied on the ground that her name was not entered in the service documents of late Tek Bahadur Thapa and also that late Tek Bahadur Thapa had married Smt. Dalli Maya Kumal prior to marrying the petitioner and thus he had married plural times without obtaining sanction from the competent authority.

5. Aggrieved against the denial of her claim, the petitioner filed Original Application No.989 of 2022 before the Armed Forces Tribunal, Regional Bench, Lucknow, which has been dismissed by means of a judgment and order dated 20.11.2023, which order has been assailed by means of the instant writ petition.

6. The Armed Forces Tribunal found that Late Tek Bahadur Thapa had married the petitioner during subsistence of his first marriage with Smt. Dalli Maya Ku

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

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