DURGI DEVI Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner's claim is that she is second wife of deceased Bhola Ram, so she is entitled to family pension, more so, after the death of his first wife, who was recipient of the family pension.

(2.) The facts as submitted by learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner are that:-

(3.) The arguments of learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner are that the petitioner was lawfully married to Bhola Ram. She gave birth to his children. So, she is entitled for family pension after Bhola Ram's first wife passed away. Inviting attention to Rule 54 of CCS Pension Rules, learned Senior Counsel asserted that law envisages a situation where pension is payable to more than one wife. Learned Senior Counsel also placed reliance upon judgment of Madras High Court, dtd. 23/1/2020, titled C.Sarojini Devi Vs. The Director of Local Fund Audits and others, WP No.34592 of 2019, wherein, the decision of the official respondents in rejecting the proposal for family pension to the petitioner (therein) on the sole ground that when the petitioner married the deceased government servant, the marriage between the government servant and his first wife was subsisting, was held to be incorrect. The second wife was held entitled to the family pension.