Case Note & Summary
The Union of India, through the General Manager of South East Central Railway, Bilaspur, and the Divisional Railway Manager, Nagpur, filed a writ petition challenging the judgment and order dated 28.01.2014 of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Circuit Bench, Nagpur, in O.A. No. 2094/2006. The tribunal had directed the Railways to grant family pension to the two widows of a deceased railway employee in equal shares. The petitioners argued that the second marriage of the deceased employee was void under Section 11 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, as it was performed during the lifetime of the first wife without divorce. Therefore, the second wife was not entitled to any pension. The respondent, the second widow, did not appear despite service. The High Court perused the impugned order and quoted paragraphs 7, 8, and 9 of the tribunal's judgment. The tribunal had noted that Rule 75 of the Railway Services Pension Rules, 1993, read with the Family Pension Scheme for Railway Servants, 1964, specifically provides that where family pension is payable to more widows than one, it shall be paid in equal shares. The definition of 'family' under Rule 70(5) includes 'wife or wives including judicially separated wife or wives'. The tribunal held that the rule-making authorities were aware of the possibility of a second marriage and made provision accordingly. The High Court found no error in the tribunal's reasoning and dismissed the writ petition, upholding the order for equal pension to both widows.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Family Pension - Railway Pension Rules - Rule 75 of Railway Services Pension Rules, 1993 read with Family Pension Scheme for Railway Servants, 1964 - Sub-rule 7(i)(a) - The rule-making authorities made provision for payment of family pension to more widows than one in equal shares, being aware of the situation where a railway employee may perform a second marriage during the lifetime of the first wife. The rules specifically include 'wife or wives' in the definition of family. (Paras 4-5)
B) Hindu Law - Void Marriage - Section 11 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 - Second marriage during subsistence of first marriage is void. However, the Railway Pension Rules are a complete code for pension matters and override personal law. The tribunal correctly applied the rules to grant equal pension to both widows. (Paras 4-5)
C) Service Law - Pension - Widow - Equal Share - The High Court upheld the tribunal's order directing payment of family pension to the two widows of the deceased railway employee in equal shares, dismissing the petition by the Union of India. (Para 5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Central Administrative Tribunal erred in granting equal share of family pension to the second wife of a deceased railway employee when her marriage was void under Section 11 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, being a second marriage during the lifetime of the first wife.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal directing payment of family pension to the two widows of the deceased railway employee in equal shares.
Law Points
- Railway Services Pension Rules
- 1993
- Rule 75
- Family Pension Scheme for Railway Servants
- 1964
- Sub-rule 7(i)(a)
- Hindu Marriage Act
- 1955
- Section 11
- Void Marriage
- Second Wife
- Widow
- Equal Share
- Pension
Case Details
2014 LawText (BOM) (11) 89
Writ Petition No.4467/2014
A. B. Chaudhari, P. R. Bora
Mr. N. P. Lambat for petitioners; None for respondent
Union of India, through General Manager, South East Central Railway, Bilaspur, Chhatisgarh and Divisional Railway Manager, South East Central Railway, Nagpur Division, Dist. Nagpur
Smt. Jaywantabai wd/o Ramrao Kewoo, r/o Nawargaon Kala, P.O. Asoli, Tq. Dist. Gondia, Maharashtra
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition challenging order of Central Administrative Tribunal granting family pension to two widows of deceased railway employee in equal shares.
Remedy Sought
Petitioners (Union of India) sought setting aside of tribunal's order on ground that second marriage was void under Hindu Marriage Act.
Filing Reason
Petitioners contended that the second wife was not entitled to pension as her marriage was void under Section 11 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
Previous Decisions
Central Administrative Tribunal, Circuit Bench, Nagpur, in O.A. No. 2094/2006, ordered grant of pension to two widows in equal shares on 28.01.2014.
Issues
Whether the second wife of a deceased railway employee is entitled to family pension when her marriage is void under Section 11 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955?
Whether the Railway Pension Rules override personal law in matters of pension distribution among widows?
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioners argued that the second marriage was illegal and void under Section 11 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, being a second marriage during lifetime of first wife without divorce, and thus the tribunal erred in granting pension to the second wife.
Respondent did not appear despite service.
Ratio Decidendi
The Railway Services Pension Rules, 1993, and the Family Pension Scheme for Railway Servants, 1964, specifically provide for payment of family pension to more widows than one in equal shares. The definition of 'family' includes 'wife or wives'. The rule-making authorities were aware of the possibility of a second marriage and made provision accordingly. Therefore, the tribunal correctly applied the rules, and the personal law regarding void marriage does not override the statutory pension rules.
Judgment Excerpts
Rule 75 deals with family pension for railway servants, 1964. In Railway Services Pension Rules, sub rule 5 of Rule 70 says as follows: 'For the purpose of this rule, rules 71, 73 and 74 "family", in relation to a railway servant means (i) Wife or wives including judicially separated wife or wives in the case of a male railway servant.'
Sub rule 7 (i) (a) of Rule 75 stipulates that where the family pension is payable to more widows than one, the family pension shall be paid to the widows in equal shares.
Procedural History
The respondent (second widow) filed O.A. No. 2094/2006 before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Circuit Bench, Nagpur, seeking family pension. The tribunal allowed the application on 28.01.2014, directing the Railways to pay pension to both widows in equal shares. The Union of India challenged this order by filing Writ Petition No.4467/2014 before the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench, which was dismissed on 20.11.2014.
Acts & Sections
- Hindu Marriage Act, 1955: Section 11
- Railway Services Pension Rules, 1993: Rule 75, Rule 70(5)
- Family Pension Scheme for Railway Servants, 1964: Sub-rule 7(i)(a)
