PRATIMA DEKA Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Shri S. Hazarika, learned counsel for the petitioner, who is aggrieved by non-payment of family pension.

(2.) It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner is the wife of one Biren Deka, who was working in the Irrigation Department as a Handyman and had passed away on 10/8/2016. The petitioner claims of having three children also.

(3.) The claim of the petitioner has been contested by the respondents including the respondent no. 6 by filing affidavit. The said respondent no. 6 represented by Shri P. Mahanta, the learned counsel submits that the claim of the petitioner appears to be a misconceived one inasmuch as it is the respondent no. 6, who is first wife of the deceased employee and as per law, it is the respondent no. 6, who is entitled to the family pension. The aforesaid stand of the respondent no. 6 is also endorsed by Shri N. Upadhyay, the learned Standing Counsel, Irrigation Department as well as Shri A. Hassan, the learned Standing Counsel, AG, Assam.