Divorced daughter’s eligibility for family pension remains subject to verification of financial criteria and income certificate submission.

The applicant is the divorced daughter of late Shri Radharaman Agarwal, a retired employee of the Department of Accountant General, Gwalior.

The father expired on March 17, 1994, and the mother, who received family pension thereafter, passed away on June 23, 2003.

The applicant obtained a decree of divorce on April 24, 1995, during her mother’s lifetime.

Although the mother died in 2003, the applicant first applied for family pension in 2021.

The respondents issued an impugned letter dated January 30, 2023, seeking clarifications and financial documents (ITRs, bank statements) to verify her eligibility, which the applicant challenged in the present Original Application instead of complying.

1. Whether there is any illegality or infirmity in the respondents’ demand for financial documents to verify the eligibility of a divorced daughter for family pension.

2. Whether the applicant is entitled to family pension arrears from the date of her mother’s death (2003) despite a delay of 18 years in filing the claim.

Department of Pension and Pensioners' Welfare (DoPPW) Office Memorandum (OM) dated October 26, 2022, which allows a divorced daughter to receive family pension if the divorce occurred during the lifetime of the pensioner or the spouse.

OM dated September 11, 2013, specifically Clause 5, which mandates that family pension eligibility for such daughters is contingent upon them not remarrying and not earning a livelihood equal to or more than the minimum family pension plus dearness relief.

The Tribunal recognized the principle of "continuous cause of action" in pension matters while balancing it against "inordinate delay" by the claimant.

The Tribunal found that the respondents’ demand for financial documents via the impugned order was legally sound because the right to family pension for a divorced daughter is not absolute but subject to financial criteria defined in OM dated 11.09.2013.

Regarding the 18-year delay, the Tribunal noted that while pension constitutes a continuous cause of action, the applicant’s failure to stake a claim until 2021 reflects significant laches.

The court reasoned that the respondents cannot be held liable for arrears dating back to 2003 when the delay was entirely attributable to the applicant.

The court determined that relief must be restricted to the period starting from the fulfillment of procedural formalities.

It directed the applicant to furnish the requested documents to the respondents. If found eligible upon verification, the respondents are directed to grant family pension from the date she completes the requisite formalities, rather than the date of her mother’s death.

The respondents must conclude this consideration within two months of receiving the documents. The OA was disposed of with no order as to costs.