Gauhati High Court
Sahida Begum vs The State Of Assam And 2 Ors on 30 January, 2023
Page No.# 1/6
GAHC010068532018
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/2180/2018
SAHIDA BEGUM
D/O LT.AJIMUDDIN AHMED
VILL- NO. 2, JALAH
P.O. BARALABARI
DIST. KAMRUP (R), ASSAM
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 2 ORS.
REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM,
ANIMAL HUSBANDRY AND VETERINARY DEPARTMENT,
DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6.
2:THE DIRECTOR OF ANIMAL HUSBANDRY AND VETERINARY
DEPARTMENT
KHANAPARA
GUWAHATI-22.
3:THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A/E)
MAIDAMGAON
BELTOLA
GUWAHATI -29
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. MD S HOQUE
Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM
Page No.# 2/6
BEFORE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH
30-01-2023
Heard Mr. M. Hoque, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard
Ms. M. Kotoki, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
Respondents No.1 and 2; and Mr. R.K. Talukdar, learned counsel appearing
on behalf of Respondent No.3.
2. The case of the petitioner herein is that the petitioner is the second
wife of one Ajimuddin Ahmed, since deceased, who was appointed as L.I.
on 15.5.1954 in the Office of the Joint Director (HQ), Animal Husbandry &
Veterinary Department, Khanapara, Guwahati. Late Ajimuddin Ahmed
after serving for more than 39 years of regular service retired on
31.03.1993. Upon his retirement, late Ajimuddin Ahmed was paid regular
pension by the office of the Accountant General (A/E), Assam vide PPO
No.KAM/49308 along with other pensionary benefits. Late Ajimuddin
Ahmed, during his life time married the petitioner as well as one Maijan
Bibi, who was the first wife. The said Maijan Bibi was getting family
pension till 26.09.2017, when she expired. The petitioner who is the
second wife, thereupon approached the respondent authorities for the
family pension to be paid in her name, which the respondent authorities
have not done so, for which the instant writ petition has been filed
seeking a declaration that the petitioner is entitled to the family pension
with effect from 27.9.2017 as well as for appropriate directions for
payment of the family pension w.e.f. 27.9.2017.
Page No.# 3/6
3. It appears on record that on 09.04.2018, this Court had issued
notice making it returnable by four weeks. Almost five years have passed
by, but the respondents have not filed their affidavits.
4. On the basis of the materials on record, it appears that the question
involved herein is whether the petitioner being the second wife would be
entitled to family pension.
5. In a recent judgment of the Full Bench of this Court in the case of
Mustt Junufa Bibi Vs. Mustt Padma Begum @ Padma Bibi And
Others (Writ Appeal No.160 of 2018), reported in (2022) SCC Online
Gau 2000, a Full Bench of this Court had determined two questions :-
(1) Whether the second or further wives of a deceased
employee where both are governed by the Mohammedan
Law would be entitled to the benefits of a family pension of
such deceased employee?
(2) If yes, to whom the family pension is payable under the
Assam Services (Pension) Rules, 1969?
6. The Full Bench, while deciding the above two questions, observed
that the validity and acceptability of a marriage of a second wife or further
wives where the parties are governed by the Mohammedan Law, would
definitely be governed by the principles of the personal law to which the
parties are subjected. It was observed that a reading of Rule 143(1) of the
Assam Services (Pension) Rules, 1969, (for short 'the Pension Rules of
1969'), goes to show that for the purpose of family pension a family
would comprise of the relatives of the officer, which also includes the wife
Page No.# 4/6
in case of a male officer. It was further observed that if the second or
further wives of a male officer are acceptable and valid under the personal
law governing the parties, the Full Bench of this Court was of the opinion
that there is no reason as to why such second or further wives would not
be construed to be a wife of the male officer. It was further observed that
a conjoint reading of Note 1 to Rule 143 (ii) and Rule 143 (iii) of the
Pension Rules of 1969 makes it explicit and unambiguous that the family
pension would be payable to the eldest of the surviving widow in the
event of there being two or more widows and further that even if there
are minor children who may also be entitled to the benefits of the family
pension, the pension would be paid to only one member of the family at a
time, where at first instance it would be paid to the eldest of the surviving
widow and thereafter, on her death to the next surviving widow, if any
and in her absence to the minor children.
7. Paragraphs 19 and 20 of the said judgment is quoted hereinbelow :
"19. A conjoint reading of Note 1 to Rule 143 (ii) and Rule
143 (iii) of the Pension Rules of 1969 makes it explicit and
unambiguous that the family pension would be payable to
the eldest of the surviving widow in the event of there
being two or more widows and further that even if there
are minor children who may also be entitled to the benefits
of the family pension, the pension would be paid to only
one member of the family at the same time, where at first
instance it would be paid to the eldest of the surviving
widow and thereafter, on her death to the next surviving
Page No.# 5/6
widow, if any and in its absence to the minor children.
20. As a corollary to the provisions of the Rule 143 (iii) of
the Pension Rules of 1969, Note 1 to Rule 143 (ii) would
have to be read to mean that the family pension would be
payable to the eldest of the surviving widows in the event
there are two or more widows, and thereafter, on her
death it would be payable to the next surviving widow, if
any and thereafter, to the minor children if the occasion
arises."
8. Taking into account the said judgment of the Full Bench, this Court
does not see reason as to why the petitioner herein, who claims to be the
second wife of late Ajimuddin Ahmed, would not be entitled to family
pension.
9. Accordingly, this Court, therefore, directs the respondent authorities
to verify as to whether the petitioner is the second wife of late Ajimuddin
Ahmed and upon necessary verification being carried out and found that
the petitioner is the second wife of late Ajimuddin Ahmed, the
respondents authorities shall pay the family pension to the petitioner with
effect from 27.09.2017. The said exercise shall be carried out within a
period of three months from the date a certified copy of the order is
submitted to the Respondent No.2 along with a copy of the writ petition.
It is further directed that the Respondent No.2 shall upon completing the
necessary verification and having found the petitioner being the second
wife of late Ajimuddin Ahmed, process all the papers and send it to the
Page No.# 6/6
Respondent No.3 so that within the time limit stipulated above, the
petitioner is released her family pension w.e.f. 27.9.2017.
10. With the above observations and directions, this writ petition stands
disposed of.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
