Smt Ganga Devi wdo Late Sep Bhagwana Ram vs UOI & Others on 10 February 2026

**O R D E R**

**10.02.2026**

**MA No 81/2025**

1. 1. The applicant has filed this MA praying for condonation of delay of 23 years and four months involved in filing OA. The application for condonation would be considered alongwith the main OA.

**OA No 56/2025**

1. 2. Under Section 14 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act 2007, the Applicant has filed this OA praying for quashing and setting aside the Impugned Order dated 29/6/2019

and that the Respondents be directed to grant Family Pension to the Applicant in accordance with law from the due date alongwith consequential benefits. She has also prayed for grant of arrears and cost of litigation to the applicant.

3. Brief facts of the case as enunciated by the applicant are that the applicant is the widow of Bhagwana Ram, who was recruited in the Army and was discharged from service after rendering unblemished pensionable service. The applicant till the date of death of her husband was in the legal wedlock and no dispute in respect of their matrimonial relations had occurred till the end of the life of her husband nor the applicant had divorced her husband. During the lifetime of their conjugal life, one male child was born out of their wedlock. However, despite best efforts by the applicant the authorities have not granted her Family Pension upon demise of her husband in terms of Rule 66 of Pension Regulations for the Army 1961. Having been aggrieved, the applicant has filed this OA praying for relief.

4. The Respondents have filed a detailed Reply Statement. They have at first taken preliminary objection with regard to the maintainability of this OA. They have submitted that Late Sep Bhagwana Ram was enrolled in the Army (AOC) on 14/11/1960 and was discharged from service wef 30/4/1976 under Rule 13 (3) Item III (i) of Army Rules 1954 on fulfilling the conditions of his enrolment. He was granted service pension for the qualifying service. The applicant was indeed married to the deceased soldier prior to his enrolment, since her name was duly endorsed in Sheet Roll of the deceased soldier, though no marriage certificate was produced. The marriage was dissolved through a consent dated 28/4/1965, as certified by Mr Kashinath Joshi, Advocate, Supreme Court of India dated 22/12/1975. In a subsequent court proceedings before Shri Har Narayan Mathur, Magistrate Class I, Jodhpur, the applicant made a statement on 05/7/1968 that, *"I had divorced him, ie, late Sep Bhagwana Ram, three of four years ago and got him divorced at home only, and it was not done in Court. I got divorced and re-married for the second time in a village of Pali District. However, I could not remember the name of the village and name of the man with whom I re-married. The marriage was solemnized in Jodhpur itself without practising social customs, there was no wedding procession also. I went*

*to the village of my second husband and stayed there for three months, then I came back to my parental house".* Following this statement, the Magistrate Shri Har Narayan Mathur passed an order on 05/7/1968 declaring that the "lady is free to go anywhere at her discretion alongwith the child", Annexure R 2 to 5. Further, in the year 1976, the applicant filed another case under Section 125 CrPC, seeking maintenance. However, the same was also dismissed in line with the previous Order dated 05/7/1968, considering the fact that the lady had already left her husband and re-married according to her community's customary system. This was held by the Munsif Court, First Class, Jodhpur in its Order dated 14/3/1980, in Civil Suit No 144/79. Meanwhile, the deceased soldier, Sep Bhagwana Ram, remarried Smt Mangni Devi, daughter of Shri Choja Ram, on 11/6/1971, while he was serving with 977 Air Defence Regiment Workshop and produced relevant certificates for publication of necessary Part II Order. Sep Bhagwana Ram died on 07/12/2000. Post demise of Sep Bhagwana Ram, Family Pension claim of Smt Mangni Devi was processed through Zila Sainik Kalyan Karyalaya, Jodhpur, where she submitted required documents including the death certificate of the deceased soldier, Annexure R/8. In contrast, claim of the present applicant for grant of family pension after ten years of death of the soldier raising question about the delay in claiming the same and she might have waited strategically for the opportune moment, potentially under the guidance or influence of others with ulterior motive, until destruction of old records held with the relevant agencies, thereby strengthening her stand to claim financial benefits. Moreover, the difference in addresses used by the applicant and her husband at the time of retirement contradicts her claim of living together. It is also pertinent to cite that the applicant had filed an FIR at the Police Station, Pratap Nagar, Jodhpur, on 31/7/2010, stating that she had lost pension related documents on Chopasani Road on 11/6/2010. The said FIR was submitted to support her pension claim, as she was not having photocopies of the required documents. Her claim for grant of family pension was also adequately replied to by the AOC Record Office vide their letter dated 01/2/2011 on the ground that her case has been examined in detail and it was found that as per Munsif Court, First Class, Jodhpur Order dated 14/3/1980 in Civil Suit No 144/79, her request for maintenance has been rejected on the ground that she had accepted before the competent court that she had married some other person after obtaining divorce from late Sep Bhagwana Ram as per local customs and, hence, she was not eligible for grant of family pension. The Respondents have further stated that as per Section 11 off Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, read with Section 5 (i), (iv) & (v), the conditions for a void marriage are clearly outlined. Given the facts of this case, the marriage is rendered void and, therefore, a Decree of Divorce is not required.

5. We have heard the counsels for the parties and perused the material on record.

6. From material on record that it is apparent that Sep Bhagwana Ram, husband of the applicant, was discharged from service wef 30/4/1976, earning him a service pension for the qualifying service rendered by him for life. The applicant herein was indeed married to Sep Bhagwana Ram, which was also duly endorsed in the service record of her husband. But their union lasted for only a limited period and the marriage between the applicant and the soldier was dissolved through a consent deed dated 28/4/1965 in which they agreed to divorce each other and to live separately. Further, the applicant had also stated before a competent court of Magistrate, First Class, Jodhpur, on 05/7/1968 that she had divorced the said Sep Bhagwana Ram three or four years ago and thereafter, she had married an another person of her choice. The learned First Class Magistrate, after hearing the applicant at that time, had also passed an order dated 05/7/1968, permitting her to go her way with her child anywhere at her discretion. Her Suit No 144/79 for grant of maintenance allowance filed under Section 125, CrPC was also dismissed vide Order dated 14/3/1980 in line with the earlier Order dated 05/7/1968 passed by the competent civil court on the ground that the applicant had already left her husband on her own volition and re-married some one else of her choice according to her community's customary practice. Thereafter, Sep Bhagwana Ram, got married to Smt Mangni Devi, daughter of Shri Choja Ram, on 11/6/1971 and accordingly made her as his LR by publishing necessary casualty in this regard. Sep Bhagwana Ram was discharged from service wef 30/4/1976 under Rule 13 (3) Item III (i) of Army Rules, 1954 after fulfilling the terms and conditions of his enrolment. He passed away on 07/12/2000. Thus, it is proved beyond reasonable doubt that the applicant herein, who claims to be the widow of the deceased soldier at this belated stage, has no locus standi to file this OA, praying for grant of family pension to her. Smt Mangni Devi, is the legally wedded wife of the deceased Sep Bhagwana Ram, who is entitled for grant of Family Pension upon the demise of the said Sep Bhagwana Ram. The Respondents have also not stated as to whether Family pension has been granted to the legitimate wife of the deceased soldier wef 08/12/2000, ie, after the demise of Sep Bhagwana Ram.

7. In view of the foregoing and since marriage of the applicant herein with the late Sep Bhagwana Ram had been considered void by an order of a competent civil court as they had divorced each other on 28/4/1965 and the applicant had indeed married for the second time with a man of her choice, as stated by her in a Civil Court, she has no locus standi claiming to be widow of late Sep Bhagwana Ram. Consequently, her prayer for grant of Family Pension has no merit and is rejected.

8. Apart from above, We also find that the Application stands barred by inordinate delay and laches of more than 23 years with no cogent reason for the inexplicable delay and, hence, it does not deserve to be entertained. For this reason, the relief prayed for by the Applicant is totally misconceived and is barred by the doctrine of laches and inordinate delay. In view of the above and in the light of the principles laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of C. Jacob Vs. Director of Geology and Mining & Anr., reported in (2008) 10 SCC 115, wherein it was held that a stale claim cannot be revived for grant of Pensionary benefits, the Applicant is not entitled for any pensionary benefits. The case is also squarely covered by the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of UOI Vs Rajwanti, in Civil Appeal No 583-584 of 2017, decided on 16/1/2017.

9. The OA is dismissed accordingly. No order on costs.

10. Pending application, if any, also stands disposed off.

sd/xxx (SANJIV MITTAL) MEMBER (A)

cda/-

sd/-xxx (GOVERDHAN BARDHAR) MEMBER (J)