Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010026752022 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/1160/2022 SALEHA BEGUM LASKAR W/O LATE AJIZUR RAHMAN LASKAR, D/O LATE ABDUL REZAK LASKAR, VILL- BALIGHAT, P.O.-ARUNACHAL, DIST- CACHAR, ASSAM VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND 6 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF DEFENCE, NEW DELHI, PIN-110001 2:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF ORDINANCE SERVICES MASTER GENERAL OF ORDINANCE BRANCH ARMY HEAD QUARTER NEW DELHI-110011 3:THE GENERAL OFFICER COMMANDING-IN-CHIEF HQ EASTERN COMMAND FORT WILLIAM KOLKATA-21 4:THE EASTERN COMMAND (ORD) FORT WILLIAM KOLKATA-21 5:THE COMMANDING OFFICER 57 MOUNTAIN DIVISION ORD-UNIT PIN-909057 C/O 99 APO 6:THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR (ORD SERVICES) HQ 57 MNT DIV Page No.# 2/5 PIN-908057 C/O 99 APO 7:RUKIA BEGUM BARLASKAR W/O LATE AJIZUR RAHMAN BARLASKAR VILL- TUPKHANA PART-II P.O.-ARUNACHAL DIST- CACHAR ASSAM PIN-78802 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. N H LASKAR, MR. A H M R CHOUDHURY Advocate for the Respondent : ASSTT.S.G.I., BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA ORDER 04.06.2025 Heard Mr. NH Laskar, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. PK Medhi, learned CGC for the respondent nos. 1 to 6. 2. The claims to be the first wife of late Ajizur Rahman Barlaskar, who was employed as a Tradesman Mate under the respondent no.5, namely, the Commanding Officer 57, Mountain Division, ORD-Unit, C/O 99APO. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that out of the marriage between late Ajizur Rahman Barlaskar, a daughter and a son were born. The son, however, expired, while the daughter is alive and at the time of filing the writ petition, she had completed her High School Leaving Certificate Examination. Because of marital Page No.# 3/5 discord between the petitioner and her late husband, the petitioner started to live with her parents. It is submitted there was no official divorce between the petitioner and late Ajizur Rahman Barlaskar. However, her husband passed away on 09.08.2020 while he was in service. The petitioner thereafter filed representations before the authority concerned and to her surprise, she was informed that her name has been struck off from the next of kin status on the basis of the documents stated to have been submitted by her late husband showing her to have been divorced. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was never served with any divorce deed or order and to the best of her knowledge, no divorce proceedings had taken place. Although she had approached the authorities time and again, the respondent authorities did not furnish her with any copy of the divorce deed or order. Under such circumstances, it is submitted that the petitioner being the first wife of late Ajizur Rahman Barlaskar, she is entitled to the pensionary benefits over and above the claim of the second wife, who is the private respondent no. 7. Since her claims were not redressed, she has approached this Court by filing the present petition. 3. Pursuant to the issuance of the notice, the respondents were filed their affidavits stating that the divorce between the petitioner and her late husband took place on 18.07.1988 before the Muslim Marriage Registrar and Kaji. This Page No.# 4/5 information is available with the respondent authorities, as per the affidavit submitted by late Ajizur Rahman Barlaskar, dated 29.12.1994. Leaned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondents be directed to release the petitioner’s pensionary benefits as she is the first wife of late Ajizur Rahman Barlaskar. 4. Mr. PK Medhi, learned CGC appearing for the respondents no. 1 to 6 submits that in terms of the information available as per the records, the late husband of the petitioner who was employed under the respondent filed the affidavit stating that the petitioner was divorced by a divorce deed. Accordingly, whatever the pensionary benefits are there, the same have been released to the other legal heirs including the private respondent no.7. 5. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the pleadings available before the Court, it is seen that there is a factual dispute raised before this Court with regard to the status of the marriage of the petitioner with late Ajizur Rahman Barlaskar. While the petitioner claims that she was married to late Ajizur Rahman Barlaskar at the time of his demise, the respondent authorities on the basis of documents available in the record submit that a certificate dated 29.12.1994 was filed by late Ajizur Rahman Barlaskar during his service tenure stating that the divorce between the petitioner and her late husband took place on 18.07.1988 before Page No.# 5/5 the Muslim Marriage Registrar and Kaji. Under such circumstances, the claim of the petitioner for the grant of pensionary benefits cannot be decided unless the question of divorce between late Ajizur Rahman Barlaskar and the petitioner is decided. In order to decide this issue, the divorce deed may be assailed by the petitioner before the appropriate forum, if so advised and upon specific findings by the said forum, the writ petitioner may approach the appropriate forum for necessary remedies. In so far as the claim of the pensionary benefits for the daughter is concerned, the same may be examined by the Department in terms of the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972 to see whether the claim of the daughter of the petitioner in respect of the pensionary benefits can be granted and thereafter pass appropriate orders as per law. 6. In terms of the above the writ petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant