The Punjab and Haryana High Court has ruled that a second marriage contracted while the first marriage is still subsisting is a void transaction and does not confer any right to claim family pension from the state.
Court's Observations on Second Marriage
A Division Bench comprising Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra and Justice Rohit Kapoor dismissed an appeal seeking family pension based on an alleged second marriage with a deceased government employee. The court noted that the Central Civil Services Rules explicitly prohibit solemnizing a second marriage during the subsistence of the first marriage.
"As such, the alleged marriage claimed by the appellant would at best be a void transaction and would not confer any right in the appellant to claim family pension from the state," the Bench observed.
Definition of Widow and Wife
The court clarified that a claimant seeking family pension must first establish that she falls within the definition of a widow. "In order to claim the benefit of family pension, the applicant will have to demonstrate that she would be covered within a definition of 'widow'. The 'widow' in ordinary parlance would mean the 'wife' of deceased person/employee. The status of 'wife' can be claimed only if there is a valid marriage solemnized," the Bench held.
The applicable rules do not contemplate a second marriage during the lifetime of a living spouse. Therefore, such a marriage cannot confer the status of wife for pension purposes.
Distinction Between Maintenance and Pension Claims
The judges clarified that a different position might arise in matters involving claims for maintenance against a husband. "The position may be somewhat distinct in the matter relating to the claim of maintenance against the husband by the lady who contracts second marriage, however, such considerations would not arise where the right is asserted against the State in the context of family pension," the Bench added.
No Ground for Interference
Holding that the appellant could not claim the status of a wife for family pension based on an alleged second marriage, the court found no ground to interfere and dismissed the appeal.
Significance of the Ruling
The judgment underscores that eligibility for family pension is a statutory right governed by service rules, not merely by a claimed marital relationship. Where service rules expressly prohibit a second marriage during the lifetime of a spouse, such a relationship cannot be used to secure pensionary benefits from the state, regardless of other equities in private disputes such as maintenance.
