The Patna High Court has instructed the authorities in Bihar to reevaluate a widow’s request for a family pension, highlighting that officials neglected a critical application submitted by her deceased husband, which sought approval for his second marriage. The court emphasized that due to the couple’s enduring relationship and their six children, the woman should not be deprived of her “spousal status” in her later years.

Justice Purnendu Singh reviewed a petition from the woman contesting a February 5, 2019 decision by the chief engineer of the Flood Control and Water Resources Department in Muzaffarpur, which had denied her claim for a family pension after her husband, a clerk in the department, passed away.

In a ruling on August 25, the court stated, “Considering the circumstances of this case and in the interest of justice, I believe that the deceased and the petitioner supported each other following the death of his first wife. Thus, the petitioner should not be denied the ‘status of spouse,’ which qualifies her for a family pension.”

The case arose after the husband’s death on April 17, 2009. The woman, asserting her status as the second wife, noted that they had six children together, four of whom are daughters. The court’s findings revealed that the first wife had not objected to the husband’s second marriage, passing away in December 2009.

The authorities had dismissed the woman’s request on the basis that her husband had failed to secure the necessary permission from the competent authority before remarrying.

However, the high court acknowledged that the man had submitted an application on February 28, 1982, requesting approval for the second marriage. This application was presented in court, and the judges found that it had not been taken into account when the pension claim was initially rejected.

The court examined Rule 23(2) of the Bihar Government Service Conduct Rules of 1976, which prohibits a government employee with a living spouse from entering into a second marriage. Nevertheless, it allows for exceptions if the government is satisfied that the marriage aligns with applicable personal laws and other justifiable grounds exist.

The state contested the petition, asserting that the husband did not obtain the required authorization and that the widow’s request should be evaluated based on relevant service regulations and government directives. They also maintained that a Hindu man is not permitted to marry again while his first wife is still alive.

The court referenced a Finance Department resolution from September 6, 1996, which specified that a second wife of a deceased government employee, who was married during the lifetime of his first wife, would not qualify for a family pension. However, it noted that minor children from the second marriage would be entitled to a family pension until reaching adulthood.

The court acknowledged the widow’s claim that the first wife was childless and had not raised any objections to the second marriage. It further noted that the couple had cohabited as husband and wife and had six children together. Crucially, the man had sought permission for the second marriage while still employed.

The judge remarked that denying the pension claim solely due to the absence of prior permission did not consider the application submitted by the husband or the broader context. The court concluded that this oversight rendered the February 5, 2019 decision untenable, quashing it as inconsistent with Rule 23(2) of the Bihar Government Service Conduct Rules, 1976.

Consequently, the court directed the chief engineer of the Flood Control and Water Resources Department in Muzaffarpur to issue a new decision, taking into account the correct facts, including the husband’s application for the second marriage and the widow’s claim for a family pension following the first wife’s death. The court established that the widow was entitled to receive a family pension from April 17, 2009, the date of her husband’s passing, until her own death.

The judge expressed the expectation that the authorities would provide a reasoned decision and ensure the widow receives the family pension in accordance with the law. The writ petition was thus concluded.