2026 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 2415
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Zahida Begum – Appellant
Versus
Home Department – Respondent
O.A./1229/2023
-CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL JAMMU BENCH, JAMMU (RESERVED)
Hearing through video conferencing Original Application No. 1229/2023 Reserved on:- 10.06.2025 Pronounced on: - 23.02.2026 HON’BLE MR. RAJINDER SINGH DOGRA, MEMBER (J)
HON’BLE MR. RAM MOHAN JOHRI, MEMBER (A)
Zahida Begum, age 55 years W/o Late Mohd. Sadiq R/o House no. 171 Ward No. 14 near Old Bal Ashram Tehsil and District Udhampur.
182101.
...Applicant (By Advocate: - Mr. Anuj Dewan Raina)
VERSUS
1. Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir, Through Commissioner Secretary to Government, Home Department Government of Jammu and Kashmir, Civil Secretariat, Srinagar/Jammu. (180001)
2. Director General of Police. Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir. (180001)
3. Senior Superintendent of Police, Samba. 184121 HARSHIT YADAV C=IN, O=Central Administrative Tribunal Jammu Bench, OU=Court master, PostalCode= 180001, L=jammu, S=JAMMU AND KASHMIR, STREET="Wazarat Road, Opposite Chief
4. Accountant General (A&E). Jammu and Kashmir, Jammu. 180001 …Respondents.
(By Advocate: - Mr. Hunar Gupta, DAG, Mr. Akshay Sadotra)
HARSHIT YADAV C=IN, O=Central Administrative Tribunal Jammu Bench, OU=Court master, PostalCode= 180001, L=jammu, S=JAMMU AND KASHMIR, STREET="Wazarat Road, Opposite Chief
ORDER
Per: - Rajinder Singh Dogra, Judicial Member
1. The applicant has filed the present Original Application under Section
19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 seeking the following reliefs: -
a) Allow the OA of the applicant.
b) Direct the respondents to settle/sanction 50% family pension and gratuity in favour of the applicant in view of compromise deed dated 10.02.2019, as well as decree passed by Learned Munsif Udhampur.
c) Pass such other order which this learned Tribunal may deem fit, just and proper in view of the submissions made herein above.”:
2. The facts of the case as averred by the applicant in her pleadings, are as follows: -
a) The applicant claims to be the legally wedded first wife of Late Mohd. Sadiq, who was serving in the Police Department as an HARSHIT YADAV C=IN, O=Central Administrative Tribunal Jammu Bench, OU=Court master, PostalCode= 180001, L=jammu, S=JAMMU AND KASHMIR, STREET="Wazarat Road, Opposite Chief Assistant Sub-Inspector and died in harness on 21.05.2018. It is stated that during his lifetime and while in government service, the deceased contracted a second marriage with one Yasmeen Begum without obtaining prior permission or sanction from the competent authority as required under the applicable service rules.
b) After the demise of Late Mohd. Sadiq, disputes arose with regard to settlement of family pension and gratuity. It is pleaded that a compromise deed dated 11.02.2019 was executed between the applicant, her one son and one daughter, and the second wife Yasmeen Begum along with her son. As per the terms of the said compromise, it was agreed that the family pension and gratuity of the deceased employee would be shared between the two surviving wives on a 50% basis and the gratuity would be equally divided amongst the seven family members. However, the said compromise was not accepted by the respondent-department for the purpose of sanction and settlement of family pension and gratuity.
HARSHIT YADAV C=IN, O=Central Administrative Tribunal Jammu Bench, OU=Court master, PostalCode= 180001, L=jammu, S=JAMMU AND KASHMIR, STREET="Wazarat Road, Opposite Chief c) It is further averred that on the basis of the compromise deed dated 11.02.2019, the Court of learned Munsiff, Udhampur passed a decree dated 20.05.2019 declaring both the wives of the deceased and their respective children as legal heirs of Late Mohd. Sadiq. Despite the said decree, the respondents have not settled the family pension nor released the gratuity in favour of the applicant.
d) The applicant asserts that she is a resource-less lady having no independent source of income and is solely dependent upon the pensionary benefits of her deceased husband. She submits that the respondents have withheld the family pensi