Allahabad High Court Upholds Right Of Estranged Wife To Receive Family Pension Over Nominated Sons

Recently, the Allahabad High Court has upheld the right of an estranged wife who was receiving maintenance from her husband to receive family pension after his death over the right of the sons who were named as nominees by the husband.Justice Manju Rani Chauhan observed that,“the family pension is statutory and beyond the employee's unilateral control. Family pension is recognized as a legal entitlement, not charity.”Petitioner's husband was an Assistant Teacher who retired in 2016 and was receiving pension till his death in 2019. After his death, petitioner filed an application for receiving family pension which was rejected on ground that her name was not mentioned in the details of family in the papers submitted by her husband for sanction of pension. Against this order, petitioner approached the High Court claiming that the fact that she was his wife was proved by the Gram Pradhan certificate, the maintenance proceedings instituted by her where she was getting Rs. 8000 as maintenance and her passbook. The Court observed that 'Family' as defined under Sub-Rule (3) of Rule 3 of the U.P. Retirement Benefit Rules, 1961 includes wife, then husband, and then sons and thereafter daughters and other heirs. Rule 6 provides for Nomination by a government employee, however, the proviso restricts the nomination to family member only. Sub-Rule (4) of Rule 7 provides that the pension shall be payable to the widow of the deceased and failing the widow, it shall be provided to the eldest son. “In the present case, the petitioner is legally wedded wife of the deceased government servant. Sub-rule (5) of Rule-6 of the Rules, 1961 requires government servants to make a nomination indicating the order, in which pension, sanctioned, would be payable to the members of their family. Provided the nominee is not ineligible on the date on which the pension may become payable to him or her to receive the pension under the provisions of sub-rule (3) of Rule-7 of the Rules, 1961.”The Court held that the age of the sons and the fact that they may be earning made them ineligible to receive the family pension, whereas the wife who was 62 years old and was receiving maintenance from the husband was entitled to the family pension. Relying on Kerala High Court judgment in Union of India v. Sathikumari Amma, the Court held that “family pension is a statutory entitlement of the legally wedded spouse and cannot be revoked or excluded by any declaration, nomination or action of the deceased employee.”Accordingly, the writ petition was allowed directing the respondent to release the family pension in favour of the petitioner. Case Title: Urmila Singh v. State Of U P And 4 Others 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 288 [WRIT - A No. - 5545 of 2021]Case citation: 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 288Click Here To Read/Download Order

Allahabad High Court Upholds Right Of Estranged Wife To Receive Family Pension Over Nominated Sons

Upasna Agrawal

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Allahabad High Court Upholds Right Of Estranged Wife To Receive Family Pension Over Nominated Sons

Upasna Agrawal

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers