Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010035242020 2025:GAU-AS:3861 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/1164/2020 ALPANA LEKHARU W/O- LATE LALIT CHANDRA LEKHARU, R/O- UPPER HENGRABARI, KAILASHPUR, P.O- HENGRABARI, P.S- DISPUR, GUWAHATI, ASSAM, PIN- 781036 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM, PENSION AND PUBLIC GRIEVANCES DEPTT, JAANATA BHAWAN, DISPUR, GUWAHATI- 781006 2:THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A AND E) ASSAM MAIDAMGAON BELTOLA GUWAHATI- 781021 3:THE COMMISSIONER ASSAM STATE HOUSING BOARD GUWAHATI- 781005 ASSAM 4:BIJU LEKHARU W/O- LATE LALIT CHANDRA LEKHARU R/O- HENGRABARI P.O- HENGRABARI P.S- DISPUR GUWAHATI ASSAM PIN- 78103 Page No.# 2/4 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR P K DAS, MR. M BARUAH Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, RAJIB LUSHAN CHUTIA,MR. I CHOUDHURY,MS P BORA (R-2),MR. R DE,SC, AG,SC, ASSAM HOUSING BOARD BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NELSON SAILO ORDER 02.04.2025 Heard Mr. S. Borthakur, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. R. Dey, learned counsel for the respondent No. 4. Also heard Ms. R.R. Saikia, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. S.K. Medhi, learned counsel appearing for Accountant General, Assam and Ms. N. Kalita, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. T.R. Gogoi, learned Standing Counsel, Assam State Housing Board representing the respondent No. 3. Mr. D. Bora, learned Govt. Advocate appears for the respondent No. 1. Having regard to the nature of controversy and as agreed to by the learned counsels for the parties, the writ petition is taken up for disposal at this stage. [2.] It is the case of the petitioner that she is the wife of late Lalit Chandra Lekharu, who was an employee of Assam Housing Board, Guwahati Zonal Branch, who died of natural causes on 10.07.2019. After his death, the petitioner approached the Board for pensionary benefits but she was informed that since her late husband also had a second wife, both the wives would get the benefits by Page No.# 3/4 apportioning the benefits. [3.] According to the petitioner, she got married with her late husband in the year 1983 as per Hindu Rites and Rituals and two (2) children were born out of their wedlock. Her late husband without divorcing her apparently married the respondent No. 4. That out of the marriage with the respondent No. 4, three (3) children were born. Therefore, in view of late Lalit Chandra Lekharu having two (2) wives, the respondent authorities have contemplated to divide the pensionary benefits amongst his legal heirs. [4.] Mr. S. Borthakur, learned counsel submits that it is an established law that a second wife will not be entitled to the pensionary benefits except the children. [5.] At this stage, Mr. R. Dey, learned counsel for the respondent No. 4 submits that the respondent No. 4 is ready to forego her claim to the pensionary benefits for herself so long as her three (3) children born out of her wedlock with the late employee get their share of the pensionary benefits. He submits that the same is the instruction he has received from the respondent No. 4. Mr. S. Borathakur, learned counsel for the petitioner also agrees to the submission. [6.] In view of above and as agreed to by the parties, this writ petition is disposed of by directing the respondent authorities concerned to work out the pensionary benefits entitled to late Lalit Chandra Lekharu and divide the same in equal Page No.# 4/4 proportion for the petitioner and her two (2) children on one hand and the three (3) children of the respondent No. 4 on the other. Such an arrangement has been directed despite the nomination made in favor of the respondent No. 4 by the late employee since the respondent No. 4 has agreed to such a settlement. The respondent authorities concerned shall work out the entitlement as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this Order and disburse the same to the parties. JUDGE Comparing Assistant