ABDUL MANAN Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this application under Article 226 of the Constitution, the Petitioner has made a grievance against the decision of the Accountant General, Bihar, whereby his application for nomination of his second wife for family pension has been rejected.

(2.) The Petitioner having completed the age of superannuation, retired on 31.1.1987. Before the pension papers could be finalised, his wife died on 4.4.1987. There-after, he solemnised a second marriage with Javeda Khatoon. The Petitioner thereafter filed an application before the Accountant General through the Sub-divisional Officer, Aurangabad, for nomination of his second wife to get family pension in the event of his death. The aforesaid application of the Petitioner was rejected on the ground that marriage after retirement will not be recognised for the purposes of family pension. Therefore, the Petitioner's wife with whom marriage was solemnised after retirement will not be entitled for family pension.

(3.) Therefore, in view of the facts stated above, two questions emerge for consideration- (i) whether a spouse-man or woman, as the case may be, married after retirement of the concerned Government servant can be kept out of the definition so as to deprive him or her from the benefit of the family pension; and (ii) whether offsprings born after retirement are entitled to the benefit of such pension