Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010053882026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/840/2026 CHIRANI BALA RABHA W/O LATE MANINDRA RABHA, RESIDENT OF VILL- BARJULI, P.O.- BARJULI, P.S.- AGIA, IN THE DISTRICT OF GOALPARA, ASSAM, PIN-783120. VERSUS UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, NEW DELHI. 2:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL ASSAM RIFLES DGAR HEADQUARTER SHILLONG MEGHALAYA- 793010. 3:RECORD OFFICER PENSION/NE RECORD BRANCH DIRECTORATE GENERAL ASSAM RIFLES SHILLONG MEGHALAYA- 11. 4:GUNESWARI BALA RABHA W/O PULIN CHANDRA RABHA. RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- MAHAMARA P.S.- JUNAI DISTRICT- DHEMAJI ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR H DAS, MR D BARUAH Advocate for the Respondent : DY.S.G.I., Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA ORDER 31.03 .2026 Heard Mr. H. Das, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. This interlocutory application has been filed by the applicant seeking impleadment of Smt. Guneswari Bala Rabha, who claims to be a wife of late Manindra Rabha. According to the applicant she is the legally wedded wife but there is a claim made by the opposite party No.4 to be the first wife of late Manindra Rabha and therefore, the department has not released the benefits of family pension either in favour of the present applicant or the opposite party No.4. Since the specific orders are prayed for granting family pension in the writ petition, the applicant submits that the impleadment of the opposite party No.4 is required and she is a necessary party in the writ petition. 3. The submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant are not disputed by Mr. S.S. Roy, learned CGC. 4. Upon consideration of the submissions made and upon perusal of the application filed by the applicant, it appears that late Manindra Rabha during his lifetime, beside the petitioner had also married the opposite party No.4, Guneswari Bala Rabha. Since, it is a question for release of family pension in respect of pension which was drawn by late Manindra Rabha, the question is to be decided between the applicant and the opposite party No.4 who is legally wedded wife, as to whom would be entitled to claim the family pension. In that view of the matter, this Court is of the considered view that the opposite party Page No.# 3/3 No.4 is a necessary party. Accordingly, this interlocutory application is allowed and the opposite party No.4 namely Guneswari Bala Rabha, W/o: Pulin Chandra Rabha, R/o: Village- Mahamara, P.S.- Junai, District- Dhemaji, Assam is arrayed as respondent No.4 in WP(C) No.3229/2024. 5. This interlocutory application, accordingly stands disposed of. 6. The petitioner will file necessary amended cause title before the Registry within two weeks from today. JUDGE Comparing Assistant