Authorities must fairly inquire into a divorced daughter’s marital status before deciding family-pension eligibility.

The applicant’s father, an employee of ICAR–Indian Veterinary Research Institute, retired on 31 March 1995 and died on 7 December 2012. Her mother had predeceased him on 26 June 2005. Claiming to be the deceased pensioner’s divorced daughter, the applicant applied for family pension on 11 April 2013.

The respondents sought a divorce deed/affidavit, its registration, and a judicial order confirming the divorce. The applicant subsequently submitted further documents, including a certificate of successors, voter card, and death certificate, but the respondents continued to require proof of her marital status. She therefore challenged the respondents’ order dated 3 April 2023 and sought family pension from the date of her father’s death.

The respondents did not dispute her heirship but questioned the evidentiary validity of the handwritten talaknama, which was neither issued by an authority nor notarised or judicially recognised.

1. Whether the applicant, being an heir and claiming to be a divorced daughter of the deceased pensioner, was entitled to consideration for family pension under the applicable pension rules.

2. Whether the respondents could deny or keep pending the applicant’s claim solely because the divorce document had not been registered or judicially confirmed, without conducting an inquiry and providing her an opportunity to produce evidence.

The Tribunal applied the governing principles relating to family-pension eligibility of a divorced daughter of a deceased pensioner, while recognising that the applicant’s entitlement depended upon establishing her marital status.

It further applied the principles of fair administrative decision-making and procedural fairness by directing the competent authority to conduct a thorough inquiry, notify the applicant of the hearing dates, and provide her an opportunity to adduce evidence.

No specific statutory provision, pension-rule provision, or judicial precedent was cited in the judgment.

The Tribunal found that the applicant’s status as an heir was not in dispute, particularly in view of the certificate of successors showing her as a divorced daughter.

The remaining question was whether she had sufficiently established the fact of divorce. Although the respondents were entitled to verify the validity of the asserted divorce, their insistence on registration or judicial confirmation of the divorce deed could not substitute for a proper factual inquiry.

The Tribunal therefore directed the competent authority to hear the applicant and assess the evidence concerning her marital status, without imposing pointless formalities.

The competent authority was directed to conduct a thorough inquiry into the applicant’s marital status, afford her an opportunity to produce evidence and participate in a hearing, and finalise her claim if she was substantially established to be the divorced daughter of the deceased pensioner.

The exercise was required to be completed within three months from receipt of a certified copy of the order. All associated miscellaneous applications were also disposed of, with no order as to costs.