DARSHAN KAUR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner-Darshan Kaur in this petition under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution seeks quashing of the order dated 18.6.2010 (Annexure P-16) passed by the Army Authorities (respondent No. 5) and order dated 9.3.2011 (Annexure P-17) passed by learned Armed Forces Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench ('Tribunal'- for short), whereby her claim for grant of family pension has been declined by holding that she being the second wife of Ex. Dr. Gurcharan Singh was not entitled for pension. Gurcharan Singh was enrolled in the Indian Army on 9.5.1952. He was married to Smt. Amar Kaur on 15.6.1948. There was no issue from the said marriage between Gurcharan Singh and Amar Kaur. Gurcharan Singh retired from the Army in the year 1973. The family members of Gurcharan Singh put pressure on him that since he does not have children, he should remarry. Gurcharan Singh, due to family insistence, solemnized his second marriage with the petitioner-Darshan Kaur on 8.3.1973. Gurcharan Singh, the husband of the petitioner, submitted an application to the Army authorities stating that his family pension be given to his wives namely Amar Kaur and Darshan Kaur after his death. The respondent-authorities (respondent No. 5), by letter dated 16.6.1990 (Annexure P-1) asked him for removing the defects as are mentioned therein. Gurcharan Singh by way of letter dated 3.6.1996 (Annexure P-2) submitted an application for endorsement of joint notification for family pension. He also submitted an affidavit of his second marriage for further action. The petitioner also had children from her marriage with Gurcharan Singh. Gurcharan Singh submitted various applications for grant of family pension to both his wives namely Amar Kaur and petitioner-Darshan Kaur. He also informed the Army authorities on 12.2.2001 (Annexure P-6) that his first wife Smt. Amar Kaur had died on 22.10.2000 and that necessary endorsement be made in this regard. The Army authorities, however, kept the matter pending although the District Sainik Welfare Officer, Roopnagar (respondent No. 4) vide letter dated 25.1.2006 (Annexure P-8) recommended the case of the petitioner stating it to be genuine. The husband of the petitioner then died on 18.9.2009. The petitioner accordingly submitted applications dated 28.10.2009 (Annexure P-9) and 5.11.2009 (Annexure P-10) for grant of family pension. Her claim for family pension was declined by the impugned order dated 18.6.2010 (Annexure P-16). Accordingly, she filed OA No. 308 of 2011 before the learned Tribunal. The learned Tribunal held that apparently the marriage of the petitioner Darshan Kaur with late Gurcharan Singh was void and illegal under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short 'the Act'). Aggrieved against the same, the petitioner has filed the present petition.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that Gurcharan Singh late husband of the petitioner had solemnized his second marriage with the petitioner due to family pressure and under compelling circumstances as he had no issue from his first wife Amar Kaur. The second marriage was even with the consent of the first wife. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled to family pension from the Armed Forces.

(3.) After giving our thoughtful consideration to the matter, it may be noticed that the marriage of the petitioner with Gurcharan Singh was not a valid marriage. It was a void and an illegal marriage under the Act. In terms of the Regulations for the Army, 1961, (hereinafter referred to as 'Regulations'), family pension is granted only to a legally wedded wife. Regulation 216 relates to eligible members of the family for grant of special family pension. Regulation 216 reads as under:-