RAMAN PANDEY Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD counsel for the parties. This petition has been filed by Smt. Raman Pandey claiming herself to be wife of deceased employee Jayanti Prasad Pandey. Son of Smt. Savitri Devi claimed appointment on compassionate ground on the basis that Smt. Raman Pandey, the second living wife of the deceased is not entitled to the benefits on compassionate ground under Dying in Harness Rules as she is not within the definition of family therein. In that context, the Court in Writ Petition No. 18397 of 2002, wherein present petitioner- Smt. Raman Pandey was a party as respondent no. 4 and had also filed counter affidavit, held as follows :

(2.) NOW by means of this petition, Smt. Raman Pandey claims for a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding opposite party no. 1 to 3 to appoint the petitioner on compassionate ground according to eligibility on any suitable post. This prayer has not been pressed by the counsel for petitioner in the backdrop that Rajesh Kumar Pandey, elder son of the deceased employee has been provided appointment under Dying in Harness Rules pursuant to order passed by the Court in the aforesaid writ petition No. 18397 of 2002.

(3.) THE standing counsel on the basis of paragraph no. 4 of the counter affidavit submitted that marriage of Smt. Raman Pandey-second wife, is void as has also been held in Writ Petition No. 18397 of 2002 referred to above, therefore, she is not entitled to any claim on retiral dues of the deceased govt. employee. The argument is fallacious and incorrect. The Court had not decided the status of Smt. Raman Pandey, the petitioner in that case as second wife nor had declared the marriage as void. The Court has laid emphasis that if Raman Pandey is second wife, even her marriage is void. Until and unless it is so declared, it cannot be said tobe a void marriage unless it is so declared by a court of cmpetent jurisdiction . The claim in her petition was for compassonate appointment and not for any declaration or adjudication that Smt. Raman Pandey is not the wife of the deceased. However, even if the petitioner can be said to be the second wife, in that case also she may not have any status of widow and will be entitled to anything but progenies of the deceased govt. employee through her, would equally share the benefits of death cum retirement gratuity and family pension till they attain majority in accordance with ratio laid down in Rameshwari Devi's case (supra),.