The Calcutta High Court recently held that where a deceased Central government employee leaves behind two wives, both are entitled to receive family pension in equal shares under the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules [Rina Yasmin vs The Union of India & Ors.].

Justice Reetobroto Kumar Mitra observed that the statutory rules explicitly provide for an equal division of pension between the surviving wives, while gratuity must be paid only to the validly designated nominee.

"As far as the payment of family pension is concerned, the same is covered under said Rule 50(8)(c)... This rule stipulates that in the event the employee has more than one wife, in the case of two wives, the family pension shall be paid to both wives in equal shares," the Court observed in its September 2 order.

The ruling came on a plea moved by the first wife (petitioner) of a Central Ground Water Board employee who died in service in 2024. The employee had two wives and was governed by Muslim personal law.

The first wife had approached authorities seeking family pension, death gratuity, and compassionate appointment.

The authorities withheld her claims after the deceased employee's second wife also applied for the benefits. The department had acted on a divorce certificate issued by a Kazi (person dealing with Islamic marriages and divorces), to hold that the first wife was no longer married to the deceased employee.

The first wife, however, pointed out that the divorce certificate was later declared by the Kazi to be void after he found that the marriage between her and the deceased employee had been registered under the Special Marriage Act.

The Court clarified that it was not required to adjudicate the legal validity of either the employee's first or second marriage.

Instead, it held that under the applicable rules, the family pension must be split equally between both wives. The authorities were directed to disburse the first wife's 50 per cent share within six weeks.

Regarding gratuity, the Bench ruled that since the deceased employee had nominated his second wife during his lifetime, she alone was entitled to receive the lump sum.

On compassionate appointment, the Court directed the department to assess both women's applications and grant the post to whichever candidate meets the legal eligibility criteria.

Advocates Debasis Kar, Husen Mustafi, and Rimi Sil represented the petitioner.

Advocates Pramod Kumar Drolia and Santosh Kumar Pandey appeared for the respondent authorities.

[Read Judgement]