Divorced daughter ineligible for family pension unless divorce proceedings were initiated during the pensioner's lifetime.

The applicant is the daughter of P. Gopal, a retired Gangman of Southern Railway who died on January 10, 2013

Her mother predeceased her father in 2012

The applicant married in 1986 but was allegedly deserted in 1994, evidenced by a private written document (Muthalika) and a "Deserted Women Certificate" issued by a Tahsildar in 1996

she obtained a formal divorce decree from a Sub-Court on April 29, 2016, based on a petition filed on March 21, 2016—three years after her father's demise

The respondents rejected her claim on September 2, 2019, stating she was not a "divorced daughter" at the time of the pensioner's death as required by Railway Board circulars

1. Whether a daughter who obtains a divorce decree after the death of her pensioner-parent is eligible for family pension under the Railway Services (Pension) Rules, 1993

2. Whether a private Muthalika (written agreement) or a "Deserted Women Certificate" constitutes a legally valid dissolution of marriage for the purpose of granting family pension

The court applied Rule 75 of the Railway Services (Pension) Rules, 1993, which includes "divorced daughter" within the definition of "family"

It relied on Railway Board Circulars RBE No. 99/2013 and RBE No. 102/2017, which stipulate that for family pension eligibility, divorce proceedings must have been initiated during the lifetime of the employee or their spouse

the court applied Sections 4, 13, and 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, which mandate that a marriage can only be dissolved by a decree of a competent court, overriding customary practices unless specifically pleaded and proved

The court also cited Yamanaji H. Jadhav v. Nirmala (2002) and Mahendra Nath Yadav v. Sheela Devi (2010) to affirm that customary divorce (e.g., via Panchayat or private agreement) is not recognized unless it is a proven exception to the general law

The Tribunal observed that the applicant’s father died in 2013, whereas the formal divorce proceedings were initiated only in 2016

Under RBE No. 102/2017, family pension is admissible only if the divorce decree was granted during the parent's lifetime or if the proceedings were at least pending at the time of death

The Tribunal rejected the applicant's reliance on the Muthalika (1994), holding that under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, marriage is a sacrament that cannot be dissolved by private agreement or administrative certificates like the "Deserted Women Certificate"

The applicant failed to plead or prove that the Muthalika was a valid customary practice in her community

Consequently, as of the date of her father’s death (January 10, 2013), the applicant’s legal status remained that of a "married daughter" rather than a "divorced daughter"

Additionally, an administrative enquiry revealed she had an independent income and lived with her son, further weakening her claim of total dependency

The court clarified that neither desertion nor private customary agreements satisfy the legal requirement for a divorce decree under the Railway Pension Rules

The OA was dismissed with no order as to costs