Jharkhand High Court: Sanjay Dwivedi, J., dismissed the petition and directed the petitioner to apply for the family pension of the dependents before the competent authority in accordance with law.
The petitioner has preferred the instant writ petition for quashing the part of the letter dated 21-02-2011 issued by the Senior Accounts Officer, office of the Accountant General whereby it was communicated that second wife of ex-employee is not entitled to family pension.
Counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner has received all the retiral dues but the family pension has not been fixed that is why the petitioner has filed this writ petition.
Counsel for the respondent on Memorandum dated 06.09.1996 and submitted that in view of memorandum, the petitioner is not entitled to family pension. It was further submitted that during lifetime of the first wife, if the second marriage is solemnized, the second wife is not entitled to a family pension but siblings of second wife are entitled to family pension and accordingly, petitioner was directed to come forward with legal heirs and successors for fixing family pension.
The Court observed that the second wife is not entitled to family pension. It was held “Thus, there is no illegality in the impugned order and accordingly, no relief can be extended to the petitioner. The writ petition stands dismissed.”[Raziya Khatun v. State of Jharkhand, 2020 SCC OnLine Jhar 1271, decided on 05-11-2020]
Arunima Bose, Editorial Assistant has reported this brief.
Appearances:
For the Petitioner: Ajay Kumar Sinha
For the Respondents-State: Mihir Kunal Ekka
For the Respondent Nos. 4 & 5: Mr Rupesh Singh
