The Supreme Court has agreed to examine whether a second wife can claim pensionary benefits after the demise of the first wife of a deceased government official. Issuing notice to the Centre, a bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and Prasanna B Varale sought a response within six weeks on a plea filed by a woman who was denied such pension.
Background of the Case
The petitioner moved the apex court after her plea was rejected by the Himachal Pradesh High Court. Advocate Anand Varma, appearing for her, contended that the High Court had turned down her plea despite her placing before it a Legal Heir Certificate issued by the District Magistrate of Chamba, with the authenticity of the document never being disputed.
The petition argued that the impugned order failed to consider that when the petitioner sought her share of family pension, she was the sole surviving spouse of the deceased pensioner. It further submitted that even the first wife was never awarded the pensionary benefits of the deceased pensioner. The petition stated, "The impugned order has failed to appreciate the fact that she sought her rightful share in pension of the deceased only after demise of the first wife. It is submitted herein that she was never in dispute with the first wife for the pension of the deceased husband."
High Court's Rationale
The High Court had rejected her claim, stating that as the second marriage was solemnised during the subsistence of the first marriage, the relief claimed by her could not be allowed. It had said that a second wife (widow) could be granted family pension only in cases where more than one marriage is permissible under the applicable personal laws of a deceased employee, and not otherwise.
Petitioner's Arguments
Challenging the High Court order, the petition cited various Supreme Court verdicts which held that where a man and woman lived together as man and wife, the law shall presume, unless the contrary is clearly proved, that they were doing so in consequence of a valid marriage. "Where the partners lived together for a long spell as husband and wife, a presumption would arise in favour of a valid wedlock," the petition said.
In its brief order, the court asked for notice to be issued on the application seeking condonation of delay in filing the petition as well as on the petition itself.
