Remarriage permanently terminates family pension for widows with children, notwithstanding the subsequent dissolution of the second marriage.

The applicant is the widow of E. Parasuraman, a retired Postal Assistant who died on April 9, 2010

Following his death, she received a family pension under the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972

On February 3, 2012, the applicant remarried; however, the second marriage was later dissolved by a decree of divorce on February 7, 2018

The applicant has two sons from her first marriage, both of whom had attained 25 years of age before the first husband's death

The applicant sought restoration of her family pension, arguing that her status as a widow reverted upon her divorce

The respondents rejected this claim via an order dated June 25, 2021, prompting this Original Application

1. Whether a widow is entitled to the restoration of family pension after the dissolution of her second marriage by divorce

2. Whether the applicant qualifies for the "childless widow" exception under Rule 54 of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972

Rule 54(6)(i) and Rule 54(23) of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972, which stipulate that family pension is payable to a widow only until the date of death or remarriage, whichever is earlier

Proviso to Rule 54(6), which carves out a specific exception allowing family pension to continue after remarriage only for "childless widows" subject to income criteria

Office Memorandum dated April 1, 2011, which clarifies that the relaxation regarding remarriage is restricted to childless widows

The Tribunal cited the Delhi High Court precedent in Smt Rupa Rani v. Union of India Others (2024 DHC 8317-DB), which rejected similar claims for family pension restoration

The Tribunal examined whether the applicant’s post-divorce status entitled her to a "reversion" of pensionary benefits.

It observed that under Rule 54(6), the act of remarriage acts as a terminal event for family pension eligibility.

The applicant’s contention—that her status as a widow was restored upon divorce—was found to have no basis in the CCS (Pension) Rules.

The Tribunal noted that the applicant is not a "childless widow" as she has two sons from her first marriage; therefore, she could not invoke the Proviso to Rule 54(6) or the beneficial provisions of the 2011 Office Memorandum.

The Tribunal concluded that since the rules specifically limit post-remarriage pension to childless widows, the applicant remained ineligible regardless of the subsequent dissolution of her second marriage.

The Tribunal found no infirmity in the respondents' impugned order dated June 25, 2021.

Consequently, the Original Application was dismissed as devoid of merit.

No order as to costs was made.