SHILLONG: The High Court of Meghalaya has refused to stay the order of a single judge after an appellant, Lahun Pyrtuh filed a writ petition seeking direction to the state government to stop the family pension given to Lokhi Keot after her husband, Kulendra Chandra Keot passed away. He served as armed branch constable in the police department and Pyrtuh claimed that she is the first wife of Keot.
Earlier, the writ petition was dismissed by single judge holding that Pyrtuh could approach the Civil Court which necessitated her to file the present appeal.
Pyrtuh claimed that she was the legally wedded wife of Kulendra Chandra Keot @ Kulen Ch. Koet who died on September 27, 2016. Besides her, Rita Pyrtuh, Minuti Pyrtuh, Sabina Pyrtuh (daughters), Dhiren Pyrtuh, Nirmal Pyrtuh and Bimal Pyrtuh (sons) are the surviving heirs and successors of her late husband.
She said that on the death of her husband and being a legal heir and nominee of her husband, she applied for pension and other benefits. Surprisingly, she learnt that she was not entitled to pension nor payment could be made to her for the reason that Lokhi Keot had been enjoying the pension benefits of her deceased husband.
She immediately filed an application praying to stop the family pension issued in the name of Lokhi.
According to Pyrtuh, Lokhi (second wife) undisputedly obtained the pension from the government in a situation when the first marriage was still valid.
The appellant said the alleged second marriage between (L) Kulendra Chandra Keot and Lokhi during the subsistence of the first marriage was itself invalid. Hence, the second wife is barred from receiving family pension of the deceased husband.
The second wife was not entitled to the benefit especially when Pyrtuh’s name had been clearly mentioned in the office record as nominee with her sons and daughters. Pyrtuh also states that since there was no dispute regarding her status as the first wife, she had made an application under RTI Act, 2005 seeking requisite documents.
Accordingly, she received the required documents on February 2, 2018 which was issued on February 6, 2018 by the Public Information Officer. She was surprised to see in the service book that the relationship of Lokhi had been recorded as wife. She further claimed that apparently there was no such dispute noticed in the record as therein it was shown that she was the legitimate first legally married wife but still the pensionary benefits have been deprived to her.
The counsel for Pyrtuh emphatically argued that there was no dispute on facts as she was the legally wedded wife of (L) Kulendra Chandra Keot and was entitled to receive family pension. It was urged that the pension and pensionary benefits has been wrongly granted to Lokhi in the presence of Pyrtuh who was the first legally married wife.
But in the affidavit-in-opposition filed on behalf of Lokhi, it has been claimed that Pyrtuh was never married to (L) Kulendra Chandra Keot. It was stated that Pyrtuh had only lived together with the late constable and never got married.
Further, it has been stated that on August 15, 1999 Pyrtuh and the late constable made an agreement owing to some differences between both of them that they have separated from each other from that day and they would not claim each other as husband and wife. And no monetary assistant also will be provided to her.
The Court said that in view of the law laid down in Bhaskar Jyoti Sarma, Swati Ferro Alloys Private Limited and Hindustan Coca Cola Beverage Private Limited case, since there is serious dispute on facts that arise in this matter, the claim of the appellant-writ petitioner could not be adjudicated in the writ proceedings.
