Photo used for indicative purpose only
Shimla, Apr 28
In a landmark ruling on right of a widow or second spouse on family pension, advancing the principle of social justice, the Himachal Pradesh High Court has held that a woman in a long-term relationship, though not legally wedded, is entitled to family pension of her deceased partner, a former employee of the Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board.
A Division Bench comprising Justice G.S. Sandhawalia and Justice Bipin Chander Negi in 15 page verdict delivered on April 25 allowed the appeal filed by a Umawati, setting aside an earlier single bench judgment that had denied her claim.
The Court noted that the appellant and the deceased employee, Jai Ram, had cohabited for a prolonged period since 1994.
“If a man and a woman cohabit as husband and wife for a long duration, a presumption can be drawn… that they were living together as a consequence of a valid marriage,” the Bench observed, while acknowledging that such presumption is rebuttable.
Also read HC Grants Family Pension to Woman in Long Cohabitation, Emphasises Social Justice
Although the marriage was earlier held void due to subsistence of the woman’s prior marriage, the Bench stressed that such relationships, though illegal under statutory law, are not “immoral” and cannot deprive a financially dependent woman of sustenance.
Drawing from Supreme Court precedents, the Court underlined that maintenance and pension serve a similar social purpose.
Importantly, the judgment highlighted that the first wife of the deceased had died prior to the relationship, and no competing claims for pension were raised by other legal heirs.
The Court also referred to provisions under the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, noting that family pension may extend to more than one widow in certain circumstances.
Adopting what it termed a “social justice adjudication” approach, the Bench ruled that economic empowerment of women must guide interpretation of welfare provisions. “The appellant, being financially weak and dependent, would be entitled to pension,” the Court held.
The leninent view taken by the HC on this issue marks a significant ruling as sofar on the similar cases courts were following a thumb rule of upholding the legality of wed lock while deciding such case, now being relied on the principle of morality and cohibition.
About the Author
