IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN MONDAY, THE 11TH JANUARY 2010 / 21TH POUSHA 1931 WP(C).No. 26889 of 2009(E) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- MEKKARA VEETTIL PARU, W/O. LATE MALLAPPALLI KARANGADAN KRISHNAN NAMBIAR, AGED YEARS, RESIDING AT KANDAMKULANGARA NEAR SREE BHOOTHANATHA TEMOPLE, KUNHIMANGALAM AMSOM, AND DESOM OF KANNUR TALUK, P.O.KUNHIMANGALAM, KANNUR-670309. BY ADV. SRI.MAHESH V RAMAKRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY SECRETARY TO GOVT. FINANCE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A & E) INIAN AUDIT AND ACCOUNTS DEPT., OFFICE OF THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A & E) M.G.ROAD, P.B. NO.5607, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695039. 3. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT EDUCATION OFFICER PAYYANUR-670307. 4. THE SUB-TREASURY OFFICER, SUB-TREASURY PAYYANUR-670307. 5. SMT. C.P.DAKSHAYANI, AGED NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, RESIDINGA AT OLAYAMBADI, P.O.OLAYAMBADI, MATHAMANGALAM, KANNUR DIST. ADV. SRI.O.V.MANIPRASAD FOR R5 GOVERNMENT PLEADER SHRI.A.J.VARGHESE FOR R1-4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C).No. 26889/09. APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS P1. COPY OF THE DEATH CERTIFICATE. P2. COPY OF THE PETITION DTD.9.1.09 BEFORE R3. P3. COPY OF THE LETTER DTD.13.3.09 BY R2. P4. COPY OF THE FAMILY PENSION SANCTION ORDER DTD.22.3.04. P5. COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN O.S.NO.158/1962 OF MUNSIFF'S COURT, PAYYANNUR. P6. COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN S.A.NO.775/1966 OF THIS COURT. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: R5A. COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF RATION CARD. B. COPY OF THE FINAL VOTERS' LIST DTD.21.7.99 FOR WARD NO.6 OF ERAMAM KUTTOR PANCHAYAT. C. COPY OF THE PENSION PAYMENT ORDER FROM THE OFFICE OF THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL'S OFFICE. sdk+ ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).No. 26889 of 2009 ================== Dated this the 11th day of January, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner claims to be the widow of M.K.Krishnan Nambiar who died on 24.12.2008. The said Krishnan Nambiar retired as a Government employee. The petitioner's grievance in this writ petition is that although the petitioner is the legally wedded wife of late Krishnan Nambiar, family pension is not being paid to the petitioner as the widow of the Government employee. Apparently this is because the said Krishnan Nambiar has nominated the 5th respondent for the purpose of receiving family pension in his pension papers. The petitioner's contention is that as early as on 17.12.1964, by Ext.P5 judgment, the Munsiff's Court, Payyannur, accepted the fact that the petitioner is the legally wedded wife of the said Krishnan Nambiar, in a suit, O.S.No.158/1962, filed by Krishnan Nambiar to declare that the petitioner is not the legally wedded wife of Krishnan Nambiar. It is pointed out that the said judgment was taken in appeal before the District Court as A.S.No.150/1965 and before this Court as S.A.No.775/1966 and, by Ext.P6 judgment, this Court upheld the findings in Ext.P5. That being so, Krishnan Nambiar being a Hindu, cannot have another legally wedded wife. The petitioner, therefore, seeks the following reliefs: w.p.c.26889/09 2 “i) To issue a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate Writ, order or direction, calling for the entire records relating to Exhibit P4 order and to quash the same; ii) To issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the Respondents 1 to 4 to incorporate the name of the petitioner as beneficiary for the Family Pension of the deceased Sri.M.K.Krishnan Nambiar Retired teacher of Chattiol S.K.V.U.P. School of Payyannur Educational Sub District. iii) To direct the Respondents 1 to 4 to pay the family pension with all sorts of benefits legally entitled to the petitioner and the pension arrears with interest at 12% per annum.” 2. The 5th respondent has filed counter affidavit disputing the contentions of the petitioner. According to her, she is the legally wedded wife of Krishnan Nambiar. As regards Exts.P5 and P6, she would contend that they are not binding on either the Government or the 5th respondent since they were not parties therein. According to the 5th respondent, the said Krishnan Nambiar had originally married one A.P.Thankalakshmi Amma, in which marriage, she had one male child and after her death, Krishnan Nambiar married the 5th respondent and begot children. It is pointed out that the son in the first wife and the 5th respondent and her children were living together along with the said Krishnan Nambiar, which is evidenced by Exts.R5(a), R5(b) and R5(c) documents. The further contention of the 5th respondent is that as evidenced from Ext.R5(c) pension papers, the said Krishnan Nambiar himself had nominated the 5th respondent for receipt of family pension. In the above circumstances, according to the 5th respondent, notwithstanding Exts.P5 and P6 judgments, the 5th respondent is w.p.c.26889/09 3 entitled to receive family pension and not the petitioner. 3. I have considered the rival contentions in detail. 4. By Exts.P5 and P6 judgments, civil courts have accepted the fact that the petitioner is the legally wedded wife of Krishnan Nambiar in a suit filed by Krishnan Nambiar himself. Once a competent civil court declared the marital status between Krishnan Nambiar and the petitioner, that too, in a suit filed by Krishnan Nambiar for a declaration to the contrary, that judgment is binding on all including the Government and the 5th respondent, who cannot have a better right in respect thereof than the husband himself. That being so, the question of the Government and the 5th respondent being not bound by those judgments does not arise, because the 5th respondent can claim only under Krishnan Nambiar. When the civil courts declared that the legal wife of the said Krishnan Nambiar is the petitioner, then Krishnan Nambiar could not have validly contracted another marriage with the 5th respondent or anybodyelse. The KSR does not give any right on him to nominate a specific person to receive family pension when his legally wedded wife is alive. Since rules provide for family pension only to the legally wedded wife of an employee, the employee cannot nominate somebodyelse for receiving family pension. As such, the 5th respondent cannot now contend that she is entitled to receive family pension and not the petitioner. Accordingly, I declare that the w.p.c.26889/09 4 petitioner is entitled to family pension as the widow of late Krishnan Nambiar. Accordingly, there would be a direction to respondents 1 to 4 to incorporate the name of the petitioner as beneficiary to receive family pension of the deceased Krishnan Nambiar and pass orders sanctioning family pension to the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. Arrears shall also be disbursed within that time. The writ petition is allowed as above. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge