Narendra Rajaram Chaudhari vs The Union Of India And Another
2017 Latest Caselaw 812 Bom

                                              1                             WP 555/17

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                  BENCH AT AURANGABAD



                       WRIT PETITION NO. 555 OF 2017


      Narendra   S/o   Rajaram   Choudhari,   Aged                     Petitioner
      60   Years,   Occupation   Service, 
      Resident   of   Plot   No.1,   Gajanan 
      Colony,   Opp.   Madhuban   Apartment, 
      Jalgaon, District Jalgaon - 425002

      V E R S U S

1     The   Union   of   India,   through   its  Respondents

Secretary, Air Force Department, New Delhi

2 The Commanding Officer, Air Force Record Office, Subroto Park, New Delhi - 110010

Mr. Vishnu B. Madan, Advocate for the petitioner Ms. Apsingekar Dipali S. (Jape), A.G.P. for the

Mr. Amol A. Jagatkar, A.G.P. for the State

CORAM : S.V.GANGAPURWALA AND SANGITRAO S. PATIL, JJ.

                                     
                                         DATE  :  17th   MARCH,  2017





                                       2                             WP 555/17

ORAL JUDGMENT :

1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With

the consent of the learned counsel for the parties

heard finally.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner states

that respondent No.2 be directed to promulgate the

name of wife of the petitioner namely Sarala @

Avantika in the NE POR with the benefits accrued to

the services of the petitioner. Learned counsel

further submits that the petitioner had married with

one Iravati @ Sangita in the year 1990. There was a

customary divorce and in the year 2013, by a decree of

divorce, the divorce was also granted by the Civil

Court. The petitioner has married with one Sarla @

Avantika and the respondents are required to

incorporate her name as a nominee. However, the

respondents are not accepting the said request.

3. The learned counsel for the respondents

submits that the second marriage would be void ab-

3 WP 555/17

initio as it was performed during the subsistence of

first marriage. As the second marriage is not legal

one, the name of the second wife is not incorporated

as a nominee.

4. We have considered the submissions of the

learned counsel for the respective parties.

5. The case of the petitioner is that he has

divorced his first wife by way of customary divorce

and subsequently has got the decree of divorce from

Civil Court. It is for the petitioner to substitute

the name of the nominee and the petitioner has

suggested the name of his wife Sarla @ Avantika as his

nominee. The nominee is merely trustee. There should

not be any impediment to accept the said request.

6. In the light of above, Rule is made absolute

in terms of prayer clause 'B'.

(SANGITRAO S. PATIL, J.)                 (S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J.)
SRM/17/3/17

                                     





                                4                             WP 555/17