Pension is a protected right under Article 300-A of the Constitution; denial of family pension to a legally wedded second wife without due process violates principles of natural justice.

ORDER :

Surepalli Nanda, J.

Heard Sri Muhammad Veqar Hussain, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Services (Home), appearing on behalf of respondents.

2. The petitioner approached the Court seeking prayer as under:

“…to issue a writ in nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of Respondent No.2 in rejecting the Petitioners’ Pension Application dt. 24-08-2021 through Memo dt. 17-03-2022 vide No. E1/1101/Pension/ CYB/ 2020-2022 as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and in violation of TS Revise Pension Rules and also in violation of the Judgments of the Apex Court of India and also in violation of Article 21 of Indian Constitution and pass such other order or orders may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Consequently, to set- aside the Memo dt. 17-03-2022 vide No. E1/ 1101/ Pension/CYB/2020-2022 issued by the Respondent No. 2 in the interests of justice”.

3. The case of the petitioner, in brief, is that petitioner’s late husband Mohd. Abdul Khader worked as Sub-Inspector of Police and retired from service on 31.03.2010 on superannuation and was receiving pension and later, died on 28.08.2020. During the lifetime of the petitioner’s late husband, the petitioner’s late husband had nominated his first wife i.e., Shabbeer Banu as his nominee in concerned records and thereafter, the said Shabbeer Banu died on 16.12.2017. It is further the case of the petitioner that petitioner’s late husband i.e.,Mohd. abdul Khader got legally married to the petitioner herein, on 24.01.1996 as per Shariah and Mohammedan Law and had been blessed with a son by name Mohammed Abdul Muqtair on 29.11.1996. The petitioner submitted an application dated 24.08.2021 for family pension with effect from 29.08.2020 before the 2^nd respondent but the 2^nd respondent erroneously rejected the said application of the petitioner through Memo dated 17.03.2022 vide proceedings No. E1/1101/Pension/CYB/ 2020-2022 without following the statutory laws and solely relying on the proviso of Rule 50 Sub-Rule (6) of the Telangana State Revised Pension Rules, which is contrary to Rule 25 of A.P. Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1964. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner approached the Court by filing the present writ petition.

PERUSED THE RECORD.

4. The Proceedings of Memo vide No. E1/ 1101/Pension/ Cyb/ 2020-22, Dated 17.03.2022 issued by the Office of the commissioner of Police, Cyberabad is extracted hereunder

“With reference to the above cited, Smt Ahmedi Anjum, 2^nd wife of Sri late Md. Abdul Khader, SI has submitted pension papers along with Death Certificate and requested for sanction of family pension and pensionery benefits vide reference 1^st cited.

Further, while verifying the Service Book of the deceased employee, it is found to the notice of that, Sri Abdul Khader, SI (Retd) had performed second marriage while in service without any prior permission from the competent authorities, even first wife was alive, which obeys the Rule 50 Sub-rule (6) of TS Revised Pension Rules, Family pension is not admissible to the second wife as marrying another wife, (when one wife is living) without obtaining the approval of Government, is contrary to Rule 25 of A.P. Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1964.

In view of the above circumstances, the pension papers along with relevant documents in respect of Smt Ahmedi Anjum, 2nd wife of Sri late Md. Abdul Khader, are returned due to ineligibility of family pension benefits”.

5. Counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent No.2. The relevant page Nos.3, 4 and para No.9 of the said counter affidavit are extracted hereunder

“In reply to Para 4 & 5 : It is respectf