A second wife whose marriage was solemnized during the lifetime of the first wife is not entitled to family pension under the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972, as such marriage is void under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955; family pension is reserved for the legally wedded spouse and eligible children.

O R D E R

Justice Narendra Kumar Johari, J.M. :

The facts of the present case are that the applicant is the widow of late Lalan Jee Pathak, who was Ex Regional Director, Central Board for Worker Education, Ahmedabad.

2. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is the legally wedded wife of Lalan Jee Pathak. The husband of applicant had neglected the applicant in his lifetime to provide her maintenance. Therefore, she had filed a case before the Family Court for maintenance and had also filed OA No. 711 of 2022 before this Tribunal praying relief for a direction upon the Opposite Party to record her name in the Service Book of her husband for the purpose of getting 100% family pension in case of any causality happened. The aforesaid OA was disposed of by this Tribunal with direction upon the officials/Opposite Party to consider the rival claim of the parties treating the OA, rejoinder and WS filed by the parties as representation on their behalf. Thereafter, her husband Lalan Jee Pathak expired on 14.12.2019.

3. It has also been submitted that after the death of Lalan Jee Pathak, the department of Opposite Party sent a letter dated 18.08.2022 in respect of submission of documents for settlement of family pension which was submitted by the applicant and on the basis of these documents the applicant has been allowed only 50% of family pension on the basis of wrong provisions of rule.

4. Counsel for the applicant has further submitted that in fact the department has provided 50% of family pension to the applicant and 50% to the Opposite Party No. 5, who is the second wife of Lalan Jee Pathak, vide order dated 19.10.2022 (Annexure-A/1) and such a portion amount of pension to both the wives of Lalan Jee Pathak is against the provisions of law and rules governing. Against the above order dated 19.10.2022 the applicant submitted her representation on 03.04.2023 (Annexure-A/4) and reminder dated 13.06.2023 (Annexure-A/5) to the Opposite Party but they have not paid any heed. Hence, the applicant approached this Tribunal for the following reliefs:-

“ (i) That your Lordships may graciously be pleased to hold and declare the part of impugned order dated 19.10.2022 issued by respondent No. 4 as contained in Annexure A/1 whereby applicant has been allowed 50% Family Pension instead of 100% being first wife of deceased husband.

(ii) That your Lordships may graciously be pleased to hold and declare the payment of 50% Family Pension in favor of Respondent No. 5 as illegal and unsustainable.

(iii) That your Lordships may graciously be pleased to direct/command the Respondents Department to pay 100% Family Pension in favor of applicant with all consequential benefits including arrears on account of allowing 100% Family Pension in favor of applicant together with statutory interest thereupon.

(iv) That your Lordships may graciously be pleased to direct/command the Respondents department to issue final Pension Payment Order in favour of applicant henceforth accordingly.

(v) Any other relief or reliefs may deem fit and proper including cost of the proceeding at the tune of Rs. Two lakhs may be allowed in favour of the Applicant. ”

5. On th