MARCYANA N. MARAK Vs. STATE OF MEGHALAYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Ms. S. Bhattacharjee, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. S. Sen Gupta, learned Addl. Sr. GA for the respondent No. 1 and 2 and Mr. R. Debnath, learned CGC for the respondent No. 3.

(2.) The brief facts of the case is that the deceased husband of the petitioner was working as Havildar under the respondent No. 2 and retired from service on 30.11.2002. The first wife of the deceased employee namely, Smti. Minarish B. Sangma whose name was entered as a legal wife in the pension paper vide P.P.O. No. 8393 however pre-deceased the employee and on her demise, the said deceased employee, Shri. Dhonoy M. Marak married the petitioner on 05.04.2013 as per Christian Marriage Act, 1872, and out of the said wedlock, a female child was born. Thereafter, the deceased employee had filed a representation to the authorities for inclusion of the name of the petitioner and the child for the benefit of pension, but the said representation was not replied leading to the filing of the WP(C) No. 214 of 2016 for necessary directions. However, during the pendency of the writ petition, the said Dhonoy M. Marak expired on 09.11.2016 and as such, the said writ petition was withdrawn and the petitioner being the legally wedded second 2 wife of the deceased employee has preferred this petition.

(3.) I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner who submits that there is no reason for denial of the pension to the petitioner who is the second wife in view of the fact that Rule 48 of the Principal Rules of the Meghalaya Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1983 had been amended. She draws the attention of this Court to the amendment portion i.e. Note (2) of Rule 48 which permits post-retiral spouses and children born/adopted legally after retirement to be eligible for family pension. She further submits that the respondents at Para 9 of the affidavit has admitted the request for payment of family pension to the writ petitioner and that the respondents themselves had informed the Accountant General. She therefore prays for appropriate directions for correction of the name in the payment pension order and for release of family pension to the petitioner along with arrears as admissible.