(1.) The petitioner approaches this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and impugns the order dtd. 14/12/2020 passed by respondent no.4 i.e. Financial Adviser and Chief Accounts Officer, Mumbai Port Trust, thereby rejecting her claim for grant of family pension in the capacity of divorcee daughter of deceased employee.
(2.) The petitioner contends that her father late Manohar Dashrath Pradhan was employed with respondent no.3 / Mumbai Port Trust as Head Watchman. He attained the age of superannuation and retired on 31/08/1992. He was receiving pensionary benefits as admissible until his death on 24/11/2004. Thereafter family pension was granted to mother of petitioner Smt. Indubai Pradhan till her death i.e. 10/12/2015. The petitioner further contends that she got married on 16/05/1989 with Sunil Magan Sadashive, however, owing to matrimonial discord, she got separated from him as per registered divorce deed dtd. 19/09/2022 executed in the office of Assistant Registrar, Aurangabad. Since then, she was residing with her parents. She continued to reside with her mother even after death of father and has been totally dependent upon family pension being received by her mother.
(3.) The petitioner further contends that after death of her mother, she moved an application for grant of family pension to her in the capacity of divorcee daughter. She had submitted the documents supporting her claim which includes a registered divorce deed. In response to her application, respondents asked her to submit the Divorce Decree passed by the Competent Court. Therefore, she instituted a proceeding for dissolution of marriage under Sec. 13 (1) (i-a) and (i-b) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 vide Petition No. A- 84/2016 before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Aurangabad. Unfortunately, vide order dtd. 25/05/2016, her petition was dismissed. Thereafter, she approached this Court vide Family Court Appeal No.15/2019. This Court allowed her appeal vide judgment and order dtd. 05/04/2019, and granted decree of divorce.