Musstt Ambia Begum v. The Union of India and 5 Ors

PageoNo.#o1/6 GAHC010090032021 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oWP(C)/3091/2021o RAIHENAoBEGUMo W/O.oLT.oFEROZoALIoAHMEDo(EX-SDI,oNAGAONoWESToSUB-DIVISION)oD/O.o MD.oHAFIZUDDINoAHMED,oR/O.oNAVAoJYOTIoPATH,oNALIAPOOL,oP.O.oANDo P.S.oDIBRUGARH,oDIST.oDIBRUGARH,oASSAM,oPIN-785001. VERSUSo THEoUNIONoOFoINDIAoANDo5oORSo TOoBEoREP.oBYoTHEoSECRETRYoTOoTHEoGOVT.oOFoINDIA,oMINISTRYoOFo COMMUNICATION,oDEPTT.oOFoPOSTS,oNEWoDELHI-110011. 2:THEoCENTRALoADMINISTRATIVEoTRIBUNALo(CAT) oGUWAHATIoBENCH oGUWAHATI-05. 3:THEoCHIEFoPOSTMASTERoGENERAL oASSAMoCIRCLE oMEGHDOOToBHAWAN oPANBAZAR oGUWAHATI-01. 4:THEoSUPERINTENDENToOFoPOSToOFFICES oNAGAONoDIVISION oNAGAON oPIN-782001. 5:MUSSTT.oAMBIAoBEGUM oW/O.oLT.oARFANoALI oR/O.oPADUMoNAGAR oOPP.oBARUAHoPETROLoPUMP oP.S.oANDoDIST.oDIBRUGARH oASSAM oPIN-786001 Page No.# 2/6 6:KAZI IBRAHIM ALI AKANDA MUSLIM MARRIAGE AND DIVORCE REGISTRAR AND KAZI DHING DIST. NAGAON ASSAM PIN-78212 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR H R A CHOUDHURY Advocate for the Respondent : ASSTT.S.G.I. Linked Case : WP(C)/2914/2021 MUSSTT AMBIA BEGUM W/O LATE ARFAN ALI RESIDENT OF PADUM NAGAR OPP. BARUAH PETROL PUMP UNDER DIBRUGARH POLICE STATION DIBRUGARH ASSAM 786001 VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND 5 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA MINISTRY OF COMMUNICATION DEPARTMENT OF POSTS NEW DELHI 110011 2:THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUBAL (CAT) GUWAHATI BENCH AT GUWAHATI 3:THE CHIEF POSTMASTER GENERAL ASSAM CIRLCE MEGHDOOT BHAWAN PANBAZAR GUWAHATI 781001 4:THE POSTMASTER GENERAL DIBRUGARH REGION DIBRUGARH NEAR NALIAPOOL MASJID PO PS AND DIST DIBRUGARH 786001 Page No.# 3/6 5:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POST OFFICES NAGAON DIVISION NAGAON 782001 6:MRS. RAIHENA BEGUM D/O MD. HAFIZUDDIN AHMED RESIDENT OF NAVA JYOTI PATH NALIAPOOL PO PS AND DIST DIBRUGARH ASSAM 786001 ------------

In WP(C) 3091/2021 For the petitioner : Mr. M.H. Rajbarbhuiyan, Md. A.S. Ali, Mr. A. Mannaf, Advocates. For the respondents : Mr. H. Gupta, C.G.C. For respondent Nos.1 to 4 Mr. A. Chakraborty, Advocate For respondent No.5 In WP(C) 2914/2021 For the petitioner : Mr. A. Chakraborty, Advocate For the respondents: Ms. B. Sarma, C.G.C. For respondent Nos.1, 3, 4 & 5 Mr. A. Mannaf, Advocate For respondent No.6

– B E F O R E – HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. VIJAY BISHNOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMAN SHYAM 07-06-2024 (Vijay Bishnoi, C.J.)

¶1Both these writ petitions are preferred against the order dated 13.04.2021 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal (hereinafter to be referred as 'CAT'), Guwahati Bench whereby the original application, being, Original Application No.040/00077/2019 filed by the petitioner in WP(C) 3091/2021 has Page No.# 4/6 been disposed of with a direction to the respondent Nos.1 to 5 to process the application filed on behalf of the applicant Raihena Begum for consideration of granting family pension to her as admissible under the law with a further direction to approve all other terminal benefits as admissible in favour of Musstt. Ambia Begum, the petitioner in WP(C) 2914/2021. The CAT has also directed to carry out the said exercise as expeditiously as possible, but not later than three months from the date of receipt of the copy of the order. WP(C) 2914/2021 has been filed by the petitioner, namely, Ambia Begum, who is the mother of the deceased government employee.

¶2The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner in WP(C) 3091/2021, Mrs. Raihena Begum filed the above referred original application with the prayer to issue a direction to the respondent authorities, more particularly, the Superintendent of Post Offices, Nagaon Division, Nagaon to look into her grievance and to consider her case for granting family pension and other benefits under the relevant pension scheme. She also prayed for a direction to the respondent authorities to dispose of her applications filed on various dates before the Superintendent of Post Offices, Nagaon Division, Nagaon. It was contended before the CAT on behalf of the applicant that she is the legally wedded wife of the deceased government employee and therefore, she is entitled to the family pension and terminal benefits relating to the service of the deceased government employee. The claim of the applicant was contested on behalf of the mother of the deceased employee, namely, Musstt. Ambia Begum, who was respondent No.6 in the original application [writ petitioner in WP(C) 2914/2021] on the ground that on the date of death of her son, Raihena Begum was not his wife, as prior to his death, the deceased government employee had Page No.# 5/6 already divorced her.

¶3The CAT after considering the rival submissions has summarised the picture emerged in the matter in paragraph 9 of the impugned order, which reads as under: "9. After detail hearings and minute perusal of all the documents submitted by all the parties including private respondent No.6, following picture has emerged that;-

(i) It is factually proved as admitted by all the parties involved that the applicant did get married with the deceased Govt. employee on 13.12.2015. This is also unequivocally admitted by respondent No.6.

(ii) It is also factually proved that deceased employee Late Firoz Ali Ahmed has expired on 06.08.2017, duly supported by the statements and documents submitted by them except one.

(iii) The claim of respondent No.6 that the deceased Govt. employee Late Firoz Ali Ahmed had divorced/pronounced Talaq on the applicant on 01.01.2017 at Nagaon is not beyond reasonable doubt. Since respondent No.6 is only 3rd person in the context of marriage relation between the deceased Govt. employee and his wife i.e. applicant, the claim of respondent No.6 is found not acceptable.

(iv) The learned counsel for the applicant also submitted that, as stated above, there is no such Registration of Talaq Nama in their translated letter dated 06.08.2018.

(v) It is also seen from the records that the deceased Govt. employee Firoz Ali Ahmed had nominated respondent No.6 i.e. Musstt. Ambia Begum (Mother) in the Form of Nomination dated 16th March 2000 which was duly accepted by the competent authority on 13.06.2000."

¶4After analysing the said situation, the CAT has passed the impugned order Page No.# 6/6 whereby it has issued direction to the authorities to consider the application filed by Mrs. Raihena Begum for granting family pension to her and to approve all other terminal benefits as admissible to Musstt. Ambia Begum, mother of the deceased employee.

¶5Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and after going through the material available on record, we are of the view that the CAT has passed the impugned order after considering the factual aspects in totality and therefore, the CAT has not committed any illegality in passing the impugned order. Hence, no interference is called for with the impugned order and accordingly, both the writ petitions are dismissed.

JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE Comparing Assistant