An unmarried dependent daughter is entitled to draw two family pensions when both parents were government servants.

The petitioner claimed to be the unmarried and dependent daughter of late Saukat Ali, a retired Sub-Divisional Agriculture Officer, and late Azima Begum, a retired Supervisor in the Social Welfare Department, Government of Assam.

After the father’s death on 22 February 2016, the mother received both her own service pension and the family pension arising from the father’s service.

Following the mother’s death on 20 October 2022, the petitioner sought family pension referable to the services of both parents.

The family pension relating to the father’s service was sanctioned through FPPO No. 928522318457 dated 16 July 2024, subsequently corrected by corrigendum dated 26 September 2024.

The claim relating to the mother’s service was denied on the basis of a communication dated 20 October 2023, stating that an unmarried dependent daughter was not entitled to receive two family pensions.

The petitioner challenged that communication before the Gauhati High Court.

Whether an unmarried dependent daughter of two deceased Government servants is entitled to receive family pensions referable to the services of both parents under the Assam Services (Pension) Rules, 1969, as amended on 9 August 2018.

Whether the communication dated 20 October 2023, denying such entitlement in the absence of an express prohibition in the Pension Rules, was legally sustainable.

The Court applied the Assam Services (Pension) Rules, 1969, including Note 2 under Rule 141, which recognizes entitlement to family pension where both parents had served the Government.

The Court relied particularly on the amendment notified on 9 August 2018, by which the expression “unmarried minor daughters” was substituted with “unmarried dependent daughters,” and which permitted continuation of family pension beyond 21 years for an unmarried dependent daughter, subject to the prescribed conditions of dependency, non-marriage, non-employment and annual certification.

The Court held that an unmarried dependent daughter falls within the same family-pension framework as a spouse, minor son or minor daughter and cannot be denied two family pensions merely because the Rules contain no express provision imposing such a restriction.

No judicial precedent was relied upon.

The Court noted that the respondents did not dispute that the petitioner’s mother had, during her lifetime, simultaneously received her own pension and the family pension arising from the father’s service.

The 2018 amendment deliberately broadened the relevant category from “unmarried minor daughters” to “unmarried dependent daughters,” thereby extending entitlement beyond the age of majority, subject to continued dependency and the prescribed conditions.

Since minor children could receive family pensions attributable to both parents, and a spouse could receive family pension in addition to pension earned through personal Government service, the Court found no rational or textual basis for excluding an unmarried dependent daughter from the benefit of both pensions.

The impugned communication was also issued by a department that had acknowledged that it was not responsible for pension-payment policy, further undermining its authority and legal basis.

The petitioner’s unmarried and dependent status was not disputed, nor was it alleged that she had ceased to qualify for family pension.

It quashed and set aside the communication dated 20 October 2023.

The respondent authorities were directed to release, at the earliest and in any event within two months of receiving a certified copy of the order, the family pension referable to the mother’s service with effect from 20 October 2022.

The authorities were further directed to ensure that payment of the mother-related family pension did not affect or interfere with the family pension already being paid in relation to the father’s service.

The writ petition was allowed and disposed of without costs.