GUWAHATI: The Gauhati High Court has observed that, where parties are governed by Mohammedan Law, the surviving widows of a deceased employee would be entitled to a family pension under Assam Services (Pension) Rules, 1969.
A three-judge bench of Gauhati High Court recently held that the second wife or the further wives (who are governed by Mohammedan Law), are entitled to the benefits of family pension under Rule 143(1) of the Pension Rules of 1969.
In this regard, the court had to determine whether the second or further wives of a deceased employee, where both are governed by Mohammedan Law, would be entitled to the benefits of a family pension of such a deceased employee.
If they were entitled to the benefit, the court had to determine to whom the family pension was payable under the Assam Services (Pension) Rules, 1969.
The court observed that when the parties are governed by Mohammedan Law, the second wife or the further wives are entitled to the benefits of family pension under the rules.
“As reading of Rule 143(1) goes to show that for the purpose of family pension a family would comprise the relatives of the officer, which also includes the wife in case of a male officer. If the second or further wives of a male officer are acceptable and valid under the personal law governing the parties, we see no reason as to why such second or further wives would not be construed to be a wife of the male officer,” the court observed.
The court, however, ruled that irrespective of the validity and acceptability of a second marriage or further marriages where the parties are governed by the Mohammedan Law, the family pension under Rule 143 of the Pension Rules of 1969 would be payable to the eldest of the surviving widow.
While interpreting the Rule 143 of the Pension Rules 1969, the court stated that it was explicit and unambiguous that the family pension in the first instance would be paid to the eldest of the surviving widow and thereafter, on her death to the next surviving widow, if any and in its absence to the minor children.
The court further clarified that the eldest surviving wife or widow receiving the pension would act as trustee for all other persons who are entitled to the benefits of the family pension.
“Family pension being payable to the eldest of the surviving widow or wife would not mean that the entire family pension so payable would be the personal property of the eldest of the surviving widow or wife and the family pension so payable would be held by the eldest of the surviving widow or wife as a trustee for all such other persons who are entitled to the benefits of the family pension in terms of Rule 143 of the Pension Rules of 1969”, the court said.
EASTMOJO PREMIUM
Help sustain honest journalism.
The bench also held that in a case where the parties are governed by the Mohammedan Law, are not appropriately maintained by the eldest of the surviving widow or wife to whom the pension would be paid, they could make a claim for maintenance in the appropriate forum under the law and not a claim for payment of the family pension by the state authorities directly to such persons.
The court clarified that if the state authorities, on their own wish, are agreeable or required to pay the pension separately to any such member of a family of a deceased employee, the judgment might not be construed to be an absolute bar on such separate payment.
Also read | Here’s why Gauhati HC junked PIL on police encounters in Assam
