Family Pension for Post-Retirement Spouse Accrues From Date of Death, Not Date of Sanction Order

The petitioner is the second wife of Late S.M. Talha Sajid, a retired Joint Secretary who superannuated on 30.06.2004

Following the death of his first wife on 18.06.2004, the deceased employee married the petitioner on 27.09.2005 (post-retirement)

Upon the husband's death on 14.12.2013, the petitioner applied for a family pension. After significant procedural delays involving the acquisition of a Succession Certificate (granted 25.03.2022) and administrative inquiries regarding children from the first marriage, the respondents sanctioned the family pension via Memo No. 15015 dated 12.08.2025

However, the pension was made effective only from 06.03.2025 (the date of sanction) rather than 15.12.2013 (the day following the husband's death)

The State justified this delay by citing Rule 210 of the Bihar Pension Rules, 1950

1. Whether a spouse married after the employee's retirement is entitled to a family pension from the date of the employee's death or only from the date of the sanction order.

2. Whether Rule 210 of the Bihar Pension Rules, 1950, applies to the commencement date of family pension claims.

Finance Department Memo No. 9961 dated 03.09.1996, which deleted restrictive clauses and clarified that spouses of deceased employees (including those married post-retirement) are entitled to family pension benefits from the date of the employee's death

Rules 209 and 210 of the Bihar Pension Rules, 1950; Rule 209 mandates that special pensions are payable from the date of cessation of service or application, while Rule 210 relates to delays in formal applications by the employee themselves, rather than family pension beneficiaries

The court reasoned that the admissibility of family pension for post-retirement spouses was settled by the 1996 notification, and no provision therein allows for the benefit to be restricted to the date of the sanction order

The court rejected the State's reliance on Rule 210, observing that this rule applies to employees who fail to file formal pension applications or whose pension is granted long after retirement

Since the petitioner’s husband was already a pensioner at the time of his death, Rule 210 had no application to a subsequent family pension claim

The court found that once entitlement is established, the pension must relate back to the date the entitlement arose—the day following the employee's death

The court allowed the writ petition and quashed Memo No. 15015 to the extent that it limited the pension's commencement to 06.03.2025. Respondent No. 5 was directed to issue a fresh sanction order, and the Accountant General was directed to issue the authority letter forthwith. The court ordered the completion of all payments, including arrears, within four weeks