Second Wife Not Entitled To Family Pension If Marriage Solemnised During First Wife’s Lifetime: Madras High Court

The appeal arose from a writ petition filed by a retired Block Development Officer who had challenged the rejection of his request to include the name of his second wife in the Pension Payment Order as nominee to receive family pension.

A Division Bench of Justice S.M. Subramaniam and Justice C. Kumarappan held, "The second marriage was solemnised during the life time of the first wife. Death of the first wife would not provide a ground to claim family pension by the second wife, since the second marriage is void."

Advocate V.Kanchana appeared for the Appellant and Advocate K.Sanjay appeared for the Respondents.

The first respondent had retired and was receiving pension. Admittedly, during the lifetime of his first wife he contracted a second marriage and was living with two wives. He applied to include the names of both wives in the Pension Payment Order so that both could receive family pension.

The Accountant General rejected the claim on the ground that contracting a second marriage during the lifetime of the first wife rendered the marriage null and void. The writ court, relying on an earlier decision in C. Sarojini Devi vs. The Director of Local Fund Audits, had allowed the petition, observing that the Court must “lean towards the presumption of marriage.”

Allowing the appeal, the Division Bench held that the writ court had not considered the relevant provisions of the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules, 1978 and the Tamil Nadu Government Servants Conduct Rules, 1973.

The Court noted that Rule 49 of the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules governs family pension and that eligibility is of paramount importance, since pension is a welfare scheme granted in accordance with statutory provisions. It further referred to Rule 7 and its Explanation, which provides that a second wife shall be eligible for family pension only if the second marriage was solemnised as per customary law before the commencement of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 or under Mohammadan Law where bigamy is permissible.

The Bench observed that the second marriage in the present case was solemnised during the lifetime of the first wife and did not fall within the exceptions contemplated under the Rules.

Referring to Rule 19 of the Tamil Nadu Government Servants Conduct Rules, 1973, the Court reiterated that no Government servant shall contract a marriage with a person having a spouse living, and that contracting a second marriage during the lifetime of the first spouse is a misconduct warranting departmental proceedings and considered grave misconduct.

The Court also relied on the judgment of the Supreme Court in Raj Kumari vs. Krishna (2015) wherein it was held that normally pension is given to the legally wedded wife and that a second marriage during the lifetime of the first wife would not entitle the second wife to pensionary benefits.

Though the first wife had died in 2020, the Bench held that the death of the first wife would not provide a ground to claim family pension by the second wife, since the second marriage was void.

Holding that the writ order was not in consonance with the Pension Rules applicable for inclusion of the name of the second wife as nominee and grant of family pension, the Court set aside the order and allowed the writ appeal.

Cause Title: The Accountant General v. M.Radhakrishnan & Anr., [2026:MHC:388]

Appearance:

Appellant: Advocates V.Kanchana, V.Vijayashankar

Respondents: Advocates K.Sanjay, S.Suriya