Order(Oral)

The Original application has been filed by the applicant being aggrieved by the inaction on behalf of the respondents for not sanctioning and disbursing retiral dues in favour of the applicant.

2. Briefly, the case of the applicant as projected in the Original Application is that the applicant was married to Late Lammu Singh on 23.01.1987 and from this wed lock 3 children were born of them. The applicant being legally wedded wife of Lammu Singh, her name was reflected in General Provident Fund Annual Statement of Account of Lammu Singh for the year 2006-07 and 2009-10. Shri Lammu Singh expired on 05.10.2015. The applicant visited the office of the respondents requesting to disburse retiral dues but no heed was paid. Thereafter the applicant filed representation (Annexure A/7) but no action was taken even after sending reminder (Annexure A/8). Later on the applicant submitted another representation (Annexure A/9) and the applicant in response to it was directed to be present in office. The respondent no. 4 is not legally married wife of Late Shri Lammu Singh. In connivance with authorities of the department prepared forged and fabricated documents with sole intention of defrauding the applicant and depriving her of the legitimate claim. The applicant in pursuance to Annexure A/1, submitted the reply and documents but since then no action has been taken by the respondents to resolve the grievance of the applicant.

3. The respondents have filed their reply, wherein it has been submitted by the respondents that Shri Lammu Singh was appointed on 29.08.1983 as Labourer ‘B’ and he declared the name of his wife as Smt. Siya Bai in the attestation form prior to his appointment. The Police verification was carried out by the Civil Authorities and he was appointed. Shri Lammu Singh after his appointment had submitted family declaration forms and nomination forms in which he had declared Smt. Siya Bai as his wife and also in his service record. The applicant, after death of Shri Lammu Singh submitted representation but, the factory intimated that as per service records Smt. Siya Bai is the wife of Shri Lammu Singh and that factory order notifying death of Shri Lammu Singh was sent to Smt. Siya Bai. Shri Lammu Singh during his service had not submitted divorse/death certificate in respect of his wife Smt. Siya Bai. Only the legally wedded wife of the applicant is eligible for family pension as per rules. Mere nomination as nominee is not a proof of marriage with the applicant. The respondents further submitted that applicant cannot be considered as legally wedded wife of the applicant and therefore she is not entitled for grant of pension and other retiral dues.

4. The applicant has also filed rejoinder to the reply filed by the respondents. In the rejoinder, the applicant denied all the averments made by the respondents in their reply and has taken his stand as taken earlier in the original application.

5. This Tribunal has considered the matter and perused the documents annexed herewith the Original Application.

6. The issue for consideration before us is regarding the suitability of applicant for grant of pension and other retiral dues.

7. It is clear as the records of the official respondents that respondent no. 4, Smt. Siya Bai was the legally wedded wife of Shri Lammu Singh and there is nothing on record to show the annulment of their marriage neither is there any decree of divorce. At the time of inductment of Shri Lammu Singh in the service he declared respondent no. 4 as his wife in his all service records. Since there is nothing on record to show the annulment of marriage of Shri Lammu Singh and respondent no. 4, the applicant cannot be considered as legally wedded wife of Shri Lammu Singh. As per Hindu Marriage act, 2^nd Marriage during the life time of 1^st wife without decree of divorce is not legal so the applicant cannot claim to be the legally wedded wife of Shri Lammu Singh.

8. Furthermore, as per CCS (Pension) Rule 19,