The Rajasthan High Court has dismissed a series of writ petitions filed by daughters seeking family pensions following the deaths of their government-employed parents. The claims were based on their attainment of widow or divorcee status after their parents' demise.

Justice Dinesh Mehta, delivering the judgment, held that the crucial date for determining the right to family pension is either the date of retirement or the date of death of the government employee. The Court clarified that for a daughter to qualify for family pension under Rule 66 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1996 (“the Rules”), she must have the status of a widow or divorcee as of the relevant date. Any change in her marital status after her parent's death does not entitle her to claim family pension.

In the lead case of Sarla Devi Acharya, the petitioner’s father, a retired government employee, passed away in 2017. At that time, the petitioner was married. Her husband subsequently died in 2023, prompting her to claim family pension under Rules 66 and 67 of the Rules. The application was rejected, leading to the filing of the writ petition.

The petitioner relied on a January 16, 2023, clarification issued by the Pension and Pensioners Welfare Department, which stated that a daughter who became widowed after the death of the government servant could claim family pension. However, the respondents argued that the clarification contradicted the Rules and could not override them. They also pointed out that the petitioner's marital status at the time of her father’s death excluded her from the definition of “family” under Rule 66.

The Court formulated the key question as whether a married daughter, whose marriage is dissolved or who becomes widowed after the government employee’s death, is entitled to family pension under the Rules. The Court ruled that the relevant date for assessing eligibility was the date of the employee's retirement or death. It concluded that since the petitioner was married at the time of her father’s death in 2017, she was not eligible for the pension, regardless of her subsequent status as a widow. “since the Government servant had passed away on 20.09.2017 and on such fateful day, the petitioner was having a surviving matrimony and as she was obviously not a widowed daughter, she cannot be brought within the realm of definition of “family” defined under the Rule 66 of the Rules of 1996 by any stretch of statutory interpretation.”

Referring to precedents, including Union of India & Ors. v. Ratna Sarkar and Union of India & Ors. v. Smt. Hemlata Sharma & Anr., the Court reiterated that administrative clarifications could not create new categories or classes for pension eligibility that were not envisioned by the Rules. The Court stated that the intent of the legislature was not to include daughters married at the time of the employee's death in the ambit of family pension, even if they later became widowed or divorced.

Accordingly, the Court dismissed the petitions, rejecting the January 2023 clarification as inconsistent with the statutory framework.

Cause Title: Sarla Devi Acharya v the District and Sessions judge & Ors. and other connected petitions

Case No: S.B Civil Writ Petition No. 11923/2024

Date: December-05-2024

Bench: Justice Dinesh Mehta

[Read/Download order]