In a significant judgment, the Bombay High Court held that mere allegations of adultery against a wife do not automatically disqualify her from claiming her rightful share of her deceased husband’s family pension under the Maharashtra Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1982 (MCSR). A Division Bench, composed of Justices Manish Pitale and Yanshivraj Khobragade, refused to grant relief to the brother and mother of a deceased government employee who had objected to the wife’s entitlement, arguing that the husband had accused her of adultery.
The Court observed that under MCSR, the definition of “family members” does not include the brother and mother of the deceased. The respondents contended that because the husband had leveled allegations of adultery in ongoing matrimonial proceedings, the wife should be excluded from eligibility. The Bench rejected this contention, noting that the pension rules permit denial only in cases where the wife was judicially separated on grounds of adultery or found guilty of committing adultery by a competent court. In the present instance, the marriage had not been judicially dissolved on adultery, nor had any conclusive finding been made.
It was noted that the husband died while the matrimonial dispute was pending, and no adjudication had been reached on the adultery issue. The Court held that it would be unjust to disqualify the wife from pension benefits simply because her spouse made allegations before final determination. The Bench emphasized that until a competent judicial authority establishes adultery, a mere accusation cannot strip a wife of her statutory rights under pension rules.
The Court also referred to Government Resolutions issued on September 29, 2018; March 31, 2023; and August 24, 2023, which clarify that family pension is meant for spouse and children, and not extended to collateral relatives such as brothers or parents unless explicitly included. Since “brother and mother” are not part of the pension rules’ definition of “family,” the Court held that their claim was not maintainable.
Given the facts, the Court declared that the wife is entitled to family pension unless there is a judicial determination of adultery or judicial separation on adultery. The objections raised by the deceased’s brother and mother were accordingly dismissed.
This ruling reinforces that rights under pension statutes are protected until properly adjudicated findings justify forfeiture, and mere allegations are insufficient to deny statutory benefits.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.