Central Administrative Tribunal - Chandigarh
Baljit Kaur vs Garrison Engineer on 20 January, 2026
1- O.A. No. 605/2023
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
CHANDIGARH BENCH
Original Application No.060/605/2023
Pronounced on: 20.01.2026
Reserved on: 13.01.2026
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. SURESH KUMAR BATRA, MEMBER (J)
1. Baljit Kaur aged about 26 years widow of Sh. Tarsem Singh r/o
House no. 2, D.S. Enclave, Baba Darshan Singh Avenue, Amritsar,
Punjab-143001.
2. Simran Kaur aged about 5 years, minor daughter of Baljit Kaur,
guardian, who has no adverse interest against the minor, r/o house no.
2, D.S Enclave, Baba Darshan Singh Avenue, Amritsar, Punjab-143001.
... Applicants
By Advocate: Mr. Sumit Puri
Versus
1. Union of India, through its Secretary, Ministry of Defence, Government
of India, New Delhi-110011.
2. Garrison Engineer, Military Engineering Services, Amritsar Cantt,
Amritsar, Punjab-143001.
3. Chief Engineer, Garrison Engineering, Western Command,
Chandimandir-134107.
4. Commander Works Engineer, Military Engineering Services, Amritsar-
143001.
5. Shashi Bala, d/o Sh. Sohan Singh, r/o House No. 56, Kalian Wala Mour,
Sunny Enclave, Amritsar, Punjab-143105.
6. Manisha, d/o Shashi Bala, r/o House No. 56, Kalian Wala Mour, Sunny
Enclave, Amritsar, Punjab-143105.
7. Karanvir Singh S/o Shahi Bala, R/o House No. 56, Kalian Wala Mour,
Digitally
signed by Sunny Enclave, Amritsar, Punjab - 143105.
MAMTA
WADHWA
... .Respondents
By Advocate: Mr. Sanjay Goyal, Sr. CGSC, for Respdts. No. 1 to 4
Mr. Pankaj Mohan Kansal, for Resp. No. 5
2- O.A. No. 605/2023
ORDER
Per: SURESH KUMAR BATRA MEMBER (J):-
1. The present Original Application has been filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 seeking the following relief:-
i) order/direction may kindly be issued directing the respondents to release the family pension/death cum retirement gratuity/terminal benefits in favour of the applicants who are the legal heirs of the diseased Sh. Tarsem Singh who was working as V/Man (Group C) bearing PA No. 372342 with the respondent No. 2;
ii) order/direction may kindly be issued directing the respondents to first consider and decide the legal notice dated 22.02.2023 (Annexure A-4) in a time bound manner and before releasing the family pension/death cum retirement gratuity/terminal benefits in accordance with law;
iii) order/direction may kindly be issued directing the respondents to first consider and decide the legal notice dated 22.02.2023 (Annexure A-4) in a time bound manner in accordance with law even if the family pension/death cum retirement gratuity/terminal benefits has been released to the private respondents;
2. The facts of the case, in brief, are that Sh. Tarsem Singh son of Sh. Charan Singh, was employed with the respondent department as a V/Man (Group-C) bearing PA No. 372342 (Annexure A-1). During his service, he was earlier married to respondent No. 5 Shashi Bala and out of that wedlock two children namely Manisha and Karanveer Singh respondent Nos. 6 and 7 respectively were born.
3. That due to matrimonial disputes, Sh. Tarsem Singh and Digitally respondent No. 5 mutually agreed to dissolve their marriage and signed by MAMTA WADHWA executed a Divorce Deed dated 02.05.2017 in the presence of respectable members of the family. As per the said Divorce Deed, respondent No. 5 accepted permanent alimony, past, present and future 3- O.A. No. 605/2023 maintenance and compensation, and relinquished all her rights in the estate of Sh. Tarsem Singh ( Annexure A-2).
4. Thereafter, on 20.05.2017, Sh. Tarsem Singh married applicant No. 1 Baljit Kaur according to Sikh rites and rituals at Dawl Kalan Gurudwara. Out of this wedlock, a daughter namely Simran Kaur, applicant No. 2, was born on 26.02.2018 at Pawandeep Hospital, Amritsar (Annexure A-3). Sh. Tarsem Singh died due to COVID-19 on 14.05.2021. After his death, the applicant no. 1 being the legally wedded wife and applicant no. 2, being legitimate daughter became entitled to family pension, death-cum-retirement gratuity and terminal benefits. However, the respondents did not release the said benefits in their favour.
5. The applicants served a legal notice dated 22.02.2023 upon the respondent departments calling upon them to release the pensionary and service benefits to the applicants and not to the private respondents (Annexure A-4). No action was taken thereon. The applicants have no objection to the right of respondent no. 6 and being borne out of the first marriage. The applicants also filed an RTI application dated 03.03.2023 (Annexure A-5) and received a reply dated 06.04.2023 (Annexure A-6), but the respondents declined to furnish information. It has been submitted that the applicants have a genuine apprehension that the respondents may illegally release the benefits in favour of respondent Nos. 5 to 7, despite the Divorce Deed dated 02.05.2017 and Digitally signed by MAMTA despite the fact that the applicants are the legal heirs of the deceased WADHWA employee.
4- O.A. No. 605/2023
6. The applicants contended that that the respondents have failed to discharge their statutory duty by not releasing the family pension, death-cum-retirement gratuity and terminal benefits in their favour despite the fact that applicant No.1 is the legally wedded wife of the deceased Sh. Tarsem Singh, having married him on 20.05.2017, and applicant No.2 is his legitimate daughter born on 26.02.2018, as evidenced by Annexure A-3. It is further the contention that respondent No.5 has no subsisting legal right in the estate of the deceased in view of the Divorce Deed dated 02.05.2017 (Annexure A-2), whereby she accepted permanent alimony and expressly relinquished all claims. It is also the contention that the respondents acted arbitrarily and unreasonably in not deciding the legal notice dated 22.02.2023 (Annexure A-4) and in withholding the pensionary benefits on the pretext of an inter se dispute, thereby violating Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India.
7. Further contention is that the respondents have acted contrary to the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Rameshwari Devi v. State of Bihar, (2000) 2 SCC 431, which requires the authorities to hold a fair and bona fide inquiry and release pensionary benefits without waiting for a civil court decision, and also contrary to the principle in Badri Prasad v. Dy. Director of Consolidation, (1978) 3 SCC 527, which raises a strong presumption in favour of wedlock and legitimacy. It is the contention of the applicants that the continued denial of Digitally pensionary benefits has caused grave financial hardship and mental signed by MAMTA WADHWA agony to them and that the impugned inaction of the respondents is unsustainable in law and deserves to be set aside. 5- O.A. No. 605/2023
8. The official respondents filed a written statement contending that the applicants are not entitled to any relief. It was submitted that at no point of time did late Sh. Tarsem Singh submit any document to the department showing divorce from Smt. Shashi Bala or his alleged second marriage with applicant No.1. As per the official service records maintained with GE Amritsar Cantt, Smt. Shashi Bala continued to be shown as the only wife of Sh. Tarsem Singh. Reliance was placed on PTO No. 20/2019 dated 20.05.2019 (Annexure R-1), Nomination Form 'A' for DCRG dated 22.01.2003 (Annexure R-2) and fresh nomination forms for Family Pension, GPF, CGEGIS and DCRG submitted on 08.03.2019 (Annexure R-3), wherein Smt. Shashi Bala was shown as the nominee (NOK) and Master Karanveer Singh as the dependent son. It was further submitted that since no divorce deed or second marriage certificate was ever furnished to the department during the lifetime of the employee, the department was bound to act strictly in accordance with the service record and rules.
9. The official respondents further submitted that under the applicable pension rules, pensionary and terminal benefits are payable to the nominee/NOK recorded in the service record and, accordingly, Smt. Shashi Bala was treated as the legally wedded wife for the purpose of grant of family pension. It was also submitted that the information sought under the RTI Act could not be disclosed in view of Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, 2005, as the applicant is not recognized as the Digitally legally wedded wife in the official record. On these grounds, the signed by MAMTA WADHWA respondents prayed for dismissal of the Original Application. 6- O.A. No. 605/2023
10. The respondent no. 5 filed short reply raising preliminary objections and contending that the Original Application is not maintainable as the applicants have not approached the Tribunal with clean hands and have deliberately concealed material facts. It was submitted that the applicants falsely projected themselves as legal heirs of late Sh. Tarsem Singh, whereas in fact no valid divorce ever took place between Sh. Tarsem Singh and respondent No. 5, nor was any lawful second marriage ever contracted with applicant No. 1. It was asserted that so-called Panchayati divorce has no legal sanctity and no decree of divorce or judicial separation was ever passed by any competent court. It was further contended that applicant No. 1 illegally procured a forged Death Certificate by showing herself as the wife of the deceased, for which FIR No. 0034 dated 13.04.2023 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC was registered at Police Station Majitha Road, Amritsar, leading to her arrest on 01.05.2023 and grant of bail vide order dated 26.05.2023 (Annexure R-5/1). It was also pointed out that the applicants had earlier filed Civil Suit No. CS/1423/2021 before the Civil Court, Amritsar, which was dismissed as withdrawn on 09.09.2023 without liberty to file fresh proceedings, and therefore the OA filed on 07.07.2023 during pendency of the civil suit is barred and not maintainable (Annexure R-5/2).
11. It was further contended that respondent No. 5 was always the legally wedded wife and nominee in the service records of late Sh. Digitally Tarsem Singh and that the applicants are trying to misuse a compromise signed by MAMTA WADHWA dated 16.07.2018 entered in proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C. to falsely claim service and pensionary benefits. It was asserted that the minor applicant No. 2 cannot derive any right when the very foundation 7- O.A. No. 605/2023 of the alleged second marriage is under serious dispute and was under
criminal investigation. It was also submitted that respondent No. 5 has already received PPO, pension and gratuity and her earlier OA No. 38/2023 was disposed of as infructuous vide order dated 19.07.2023 with liberty only regarding interest on delayed payment (Annexure R-
5/3). The respondent No. 5 therefore maintained that the OA is based on suppression, forgery and abuse of process of law and deserves to be dismissed both on merits and on the ground of maintainability.
12. The Tribunal has heard the learned counsel for the applicants and the respondents and perused the pleadings, annexures, and documents filed along with the Original Application.
13. Learned counsel for the applicants has expressly stated that the claim qua Applicant No. 1 for family pension and other retiral benefits is not pressed. The contention now is limited to applicant No. 2, who is stated to be the daughter of the deceased employee, Sh. Tarsem Singh, and Applicant No. 1, and is therefore asserted to be a legal heir of the deceased.
14. It is noted that the respondents have relied on official service records, nomination forms, and the absence of formal judicial divorce or registration of a second marriage during the lifetime of the deceased employee. Respondent No. 5 has contended that she remained the legally wedded wife and nominee in the service records and has raised Digitally serious objections, including allegations of forgery and criminal signed by MAMTA WADHWA proceedings against Applicant No. 1, and argued that the OA is not maintainable.
8- O.A. No. 605/2023
15. From the perusal of material on record, I find that the applicant has placed on record copy of divorce deed (Annexure A-2), where by the deceased Sh. Tarsem Singh and Respondent no. 5 Shashi Bala mutually decided for dissolution of marriage and settlement of other matrimonial and alimony disputes. The marriage of Tarsem Singh with applicant no. 1 Baljit Kaur performed on 20.05.2012 at Gurudwara Sahib. The marriage certificate issued by Bhai Sangat Singh Ji Gurudwara Sahib has also been placed record as Annexure A-3. The Birth certificate of Applicant no. 2 issued by the Chief Registrar, Births and Deaths, Health and Family Welfare Department, Government of Punjab is also on record at Annexure A-3, wherein the father name of applicant no. 2 is mentioned as Tarsem Singh. The paternity of applicant no. 2 with the deceased employee Sh. Tarsem Singh has not been disputed by the respondents neither in reply nor during the course of arguments.
16. The Tribunal has carefully considered the submissions of learned counsel for the applicants in the light of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Rameshwari Devi v. State of Bihar, (2000) 2 SCC 431, which recognizes that minor children of a void second marriage under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1956, are entitled to family pension and are legitimate through the marriage itself, while the second widow is not entitled to claim pension. In view of this legal position, the entitlement of Applicant No. 2 as the minor daughter of the deceased employee is to be considered independently of the claims of Applicant Digitally No. 1.
signed by MAMTA WADHWA
17. Considering the submissions and the material on record, and applying the principles of law, the Tribunal finds that Applicant No. 2 is 9- O.A. No. 605/2023 entitled to receive the appropriate share of family pension and other applicable benefits in accordance with the rules and law. The other allegations regarding the validity of the marriage of Applicant No. 1 and disputes regarding criminal proceedings or prior civil suits do not disentitle the minor Applicant No. 2 from receiving the pensionary benefits due to her as a legal heir.
18. Accordingly, the Original Application is partially allowed. The respondents are directed to release the appropriate share of family pension and other retiral benefits i.e. DCRG to Applicant No. 2 in accordance with the rules and law, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No relief is granted to Applicant No. 1. The OA stands disposed of on these terms. No order as to costs.
(SURESH KUMAR BATRA) MEMBER (J) Dated: 20.01.2026 'mw' Digitally signed by MAMTA WADHWA