Consider including live-in partner in family pension: Delhi HC to Centre

The Delhi High Court has directed the Centre to examine a retired government employee’s plea seeking inclusion of his live-in partner of over four decades and their children in official records for family pension and healthcare benefits.

 

In a judgment delivered earlier this week, a Bench of Justices Navin Chawla and Madhu Jain set aside a 2018 order of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) that had upheld the permanent withholding of 50 per cent of the petitioner’s pension and gratuity.

Court finds no concealment or grave misconduct

The court held that the petitioner had consistently disclosed his long-term live-in relationship and the continuous absence of his legally wedded wife throughout his service. Treating his attempt to secure pensionary recognition for his partner and children as “grave misconduct” was legally unsustainable, the Bench said.

 

 

“The CCS (Pension) Rules empower the authorities to withhold pension only in cases of grave misconduct or negligence,” the court said, adding, “The petitioner’s conduct does not fall within the ambit of ‘grave misconduct’ or ‘negligence’ as contemplated under the Rules.”

 

“We find no legitimate reason for the respondents to permanently withhold 50 per cent of the petitioner’s monthly pension and gratuity or for denying family pension to the petitioner’s dependents,” the court said.

 

It added that the petitioner had maintained transparency at all stages and had no mala fide intent while seeking inclusion of his partner and children in service records.

About the dispute

The petitioner, who joined government service in 1976, began cohabiting with another woman in 1983 after his wife left him and refused to consent to a divorce. Two children were born from the relationship.

 

While he earlier faced departmental action in the 1990s for personal conduct, a second inquiry was initiated just before his retirement over alleged misrepresentation while applying for diplomatic passports for his partner and children. This led to an order withholding half of his pensionary benefits after retirement in 2012.

 

The High Court noted that the earlier disciplinary proceedings themselves showed the authorities were aware of the relationship, ruling out any charge of concealment.

 

“The record clearly establishes that the petitioner never concealed his relationship,” the judgment said, adding that prolonged cohabitation had been acknowledged even by the inquiry officer.

 

“Identifying the partner as family for pensionary purposes, based on long cohabitation, cannot be treated as misconduct,” it said.

Relief granted

Setting aside the tribunal’s order, the court directed the Centre to release the withheld pension and gratuity along with interest at six per cent per annum from the date the amounts became due.

 

It also ordered the authorities to consider the petitioner’s request to include the name of his live-in partner and their children in the Pension Payment Order for family pension and Central Government Health Scheme (CGHS) facilities.

 

The directions, the court said, must be complied with within eight weeks.