Page No.# 1/7 GAHC010207542025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/5474/2025 MONOWARA KHATUN AND ANR W/O LT. ABU BAKKAR SIDDIQUE, VILL- DIARA (GARAMARI PT-II), P.O.- RADHAMADHAB HAT, P.S.- MANKACHAR, DIST- SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR, ASSAM, PIN-783131 2: MONCHEHERA KHATUN W/O LT. ABU BAKKAR SIDDIQUE VILL- DIARA (GARAMARI PT-II) P.O.- RADHAMADHAB HAT P.S.- MANKACHAR DIST- SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR ASSAM PIN-78313 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS. REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-06 2:THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL ASSAM MAIDAMGAON BELTOLA GUWAHATI-29 3:THE DIRECTOR OF PENSION ASSAM HOUSEFED COMPLEX DISPUR GUWAHATI-06 4:THE DIRECTOR OF HEALTH SERVICES Page No.# 2/7 ASSAM HENGRABARI GUWAHATI-36 5:THE JOINT DIRECTOR OF HEALTH SERVICES DHUBRI P.O.- DHUBRI DIST- DHUBRI ASSAM PIN-783001 6:THE JOINT DIRECTOR OF HEALTH SERVICES SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR P.O.- HATSINGIMARI DIST- SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR ASSAM PIN-783135 7:THE MEDICAL OFFICER TUMNI COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTRE (C.H.C.) P.O.- TUMNI DIST- SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR ASSAM PIN-78312 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M R KHANDAKAR, MR. A ROHMAN Advocate for the Respondent : SC, HEALTH, SC, AG,GA, ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR ORDER Date : 12-11-2025 Heard Mr. M.R. Khandakar, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Ms. D. Bora, learned standing counsel, H&FW Department, Assam as well as Mr. B. Sarma, learned standing counsel, AG(A&E), Assam. 2. The writ petitioners who are the wives of Late Abu Bakkar Siddique have joined together to institute the present writ petition praying for a direction upon the respondent Page No.# 3/7 authorities to release to them their due family pension along with arrears thereof w.e.f. May, 2022, in respect of the service rendered by their husband, who at the time of his death was serving as a Gr-IV employee at the Tumni Kawahagi CHC under the Health & Family (H&FW) Department. 3. The facts, in brief, requisite for adjudication of the issues arising in the present writ petition is noticed as under: The petitioner No. 1 is the first wife of late Abu Bakkar Siddique while the petitioner No. 2 is his second wife. Late Abu Bakkar Siddique while serving as a Gr-IV employee in Tumni Kawahagi CHC under the H&FW Department had retired from his services on 30- 04-2022. Thereafter, he had passed away, on 22-05-2022. The petitioners, herein, being the wives of late Abu Bakkar Siddique, had approached the authorities for releasing to them their due family pension. However, it is seen that the respondent authorities have not considered the prayer made by the petitioners, herein. Accordingly, the petitioners have instituted the present proceeding, inter-alia, praying that the family pension be released to them in equal proportion along with release of arrears in equal proportion to them. 4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and also perused the materials available on record. 5. The entitlement of the petitioners, herein, to be authorized family pension in respect of the services rendered by their husband late Abu Bakkar Siddique having not been disputed in the present proceeding by the respondent authorities, this Court holds Page No.# 4/7 that the petitioners, herein, are entitled to be authorized family pension in accordance with the provision of the Assam Services (Pension) Rules, 1969. However, a issue would arise, herein, as to the manner in which the said family pension and other pensionary benefits is to be released to the petitioners, herein. The said issue need not detain this Court any further inasmuch as the issue has already been laid to rest by the decision of the Full Bench by this Court in the case of Musstt. Junufa Bibi Vs. Mustt. Padma Begum & Ors. (judgment dated 22-12-2022 in W.A. No. 160/2018). 6. The Full Bench of this Court after considering all relevant issues had drawn the following conclusions: “21. In the circumstance, the concept of a validity and acceptability of a second marriage where the parties are governed by the Mohammedan Law and the consequential entitlement to the benefits of a family pension and the concept to whom the family pension would be payable under the Pension Rules of 1969 are held to be two separate and unrelated concepts and the implication of the concept of a validity and acceptability of a second marriage or further marriages where the parties are governed by the Mohammedan Law would have no bearing on the concept to whom the family pension is payable under the Pension Rules of 1969. It is held that irrespective of the validity and acceptability of a second marriage or further marriages where the parties are governed by the Mohammedan Law, the family pension under Rule 143 of the Pension Rules of 1969 would be payable to the eldest of the surviving widow, which would also be applicable for a family pension where the parties are governed by the principles of Mohammedan Law, and where there may be a validity and acceptability of the second wife or further wives in respect of a deceased Mohammedan employee. 22. We further hold that the family pension being payable to the eldest of the surviving widow or wife would not mean that the entire family pension so payable would be the personal property of the eldest of the surviving widow or wife and the family pension so payable would be held by the eldest of the surviving widow or wife as a trustee for all such other persons who are entitled to the benefits of the family pension in terms of Rule 143 of the Pension Rules of 1969. 23. 23. We also provide that in the event any such other persons who are entitled to the benefits of the family pension in terms of Rule 143 of the Pension Rules of 1969, including the second or further wives, in a case where the parties Page No.# 5/7 are governed by the Mohammedan Law, are not appropriately maintained by the eldest of the surviving widow or wife to whom the pension would be paid, the remedy thereof would be to make a claim for maintenance in the appropriate forum under the law and not a claim for a payment of the family pension by the State authorities directly to such persons. But however, if in a given case the State authorities on their own volition are of the view that under an acceptable circumstance the authorities are agreeable or required to pay the pension separately to any such member of a family of a deceased employee, this judgment may not be construed to be an absolute bar on such separate payment. 7. A perusal of the conclusions drawn by the Full Bench of this Court in the case of Musstt. Junufa Bibi (Supra) would bring to the forefront that while both the first and the second wife, of a Government employee governed by the Mohammedan Law, are entitled to be authorized family pension, the family pension would be payable to the eldest of the surviving widow or wife. It was stipulated that the pension to the eldest surviving widow would not mean the same would be utilized by her for herself but she would be receiving the same as trustee for all the persons who are entitled to the benefit of family pension in terms of the Rule 143 of the Pension Rules, 1969. The Full Bench further stipulated that in the event the eldest surviving widow on receiving family pension does not make a provision for maintenance of the other heirs, the remedy available to the heirs would be to make a claim for maintenance in an appropriate forum under the law and a claim for payment of family pension by the State authorities directly to each of the heirs would not be maintainable. 8. In view of the decision of the Full Bench of this Court, this Court is of the considered view that the entitlement of the petitioners, herein, to receive family pension and pensionary benefits in respect of the services rendered by late Abu Bakkar Siddique Page No.# 6/7 being not disputed, the respondent authority in the Department of Health & Family Welfare, Govt. of Assam, shall within a period of 03 (three) months, from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, process the family pension proposal of the petitioners and submit the same to the office of the AG(A&E), Assam. The office of the AG(A&E), Assam on receipt of the proposal, complete in all respect, shall authorize to the petitioner No. 1, herein, the family pension and issue the requisite order(s) accordingly. The other pensionary benefits, including the arrears receivable w.e.f. 22-05-2022, be also released to the eldest surviving widow, i.e. the petitioner No. 1. The eldest surviving widow, i.e. the petitioner No. 1, herein, on receipt of the arrears of family pension and other pensionary benefits shall apportion 50% thereof to the petitioner No. 2, in her Bank account. Thereafter, the petitioner No. 1 shall continue to deposit 50% of the family pension received by her in the account of the petitioner No. 2, every month, during her lifetime. In the event, the petitioner No. 1 on being authorized the family pension and pensionary benefits do not provide there-from to the petitioner No. 2 in the manner indicated, hereinabove, it would be open to the petitioner No. 2 to institute appropriate proceeding claiming maintenance from the petitioner No. 1 before the appropriate forum in accordance with law. With the above observations and directions, the present writ petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Page No.# 7/7 Comparing Assistant