Legally wedded second wife under Muslim Law is entitled to family pension under applicable service regulations.

The applicant, Smt. Pervaiz Akhter, is the second wife of Late Shri Mohd. Bashir, a Government Teacher who retired in 2009 and died on 15.04.2021

The deceased had first married Smt. Khursheed Begum (issueless) in 1970 and subsequently entered into a second marriage with the applicant in 1992 under Muslim Personal Law

Following the death of the husband, the family pension was initially sanctioned to the first wife, being the recorded nominee

The first wife executed a 'no objection' affidavit in 2021 for the grant of 50% pension to the applicant

After the first wife's death on 13.01.2022, the applicant sought the full family pension as the sole surviving widow, supported by 'no objection' certificates from her children

Despite recommendations from the Zonal Education Officer and Assistant Treasury Officer, the respondents failed to sanction the pension

1. Whether a legally wedded second wife under Muslim Personal Law is entitled to the family pension under the applicable Civil Service Regulations

2. Whether the respondents are required to settle the pension claim in the absence of rival claimants and in light of judicial precedents

The Tribunal considered the Muslim Personal Law regarding the validity of a second marriage and the Civil Service Regulations which provide for the admissibility of family pension to more than one widow if permitted by the employee's personal law

The court specifically relied on the precedent set by the Hon’ble Gauhati High Court in Mustt. Junufa Bibi vs. Mustt. Padma Begum Bibi Ors. (WA/160/2018), which deals with the entitlement of multiple widows to pensionary benefits under personal law frameworks

The Tribunal noted that the applicant's status as a legally wedded second wife was established under Muslim Law and supported by the fact that the first marriage was issueless

It observed that the first wife had not only consented to the sharing of the pension during her lifetime but had since passed away, leaving no rival claimants for the benefit

The court reasoned that since the Civil Service Regulations accommodate personal law provisions, and the departmental authorities had already recommended the case, the respondents were obligated to evaluate the claim through the lens of established legal precedents

The Tribunal emphasized the principle of parity, directing the respondents to determine if the applicant is "similarly situated" to the beneficiaries in the Mustt. Junufa Bibi case

The court held that if the applicant is found to be similarly situated to the parties in the cited precedent, she shall be extended the same benefits

The respondents were ordered to complete this exercise within six weeks from the receipt of the order

No order as to costs was issued