Ahmedabad: The Gujarat high court has directed the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation (AMC) to grant family pension to the second wife of a deceased employee, rejecting the civic body’s insistence on a registered nikahnama as proof of marriage. The court relied on evidence, including her maintenance case and an FIR under Section 498A of the IPC with a chargesheet, as conclusive proof of the marriage.According to the case details, Mohammed Hanif Shaikh, who was employed with AMC’s estate department, had first married Rehanabanu, with whom he had two children. After Rehanabanu’s death in July 2007, Shaikh contracted a second marriage in Dec 2007 with Farzanabanu according to the rituals of Islamic law. Shaikh died in 2011, following which Farzanabanu claimed family pension from the AMC. The civic body denied Farzanabanu’s claim, prompting her to approach the high court in 2016. AMC initially insisted on a succession certificate, but the HC directed the civic body to decide by examining the validity of the marriage. When the AMC denied her claim, she filed a second petition in the HC. Before the court, Farzanabanu produced a nikahnama, an affidavit by the qazi who solemnized the nikah, her maintenance application in the family court — in which Shaikh had admitted to the marriage — and a criminal case she had filed under Section 498A of the IPC, which was abated after Shaikh’s death, along with its chargesheet. The AMC, however, maintained that the nikahnama was not registered; that there was no joint photograph of the couple; that the employee had not informed his employer of the second marriage; that her name did not appear in the service book; and that the employee’s family members had not confirmed the second marriage. Shaikh’s two children from his first wife also opposed Farzanabanu’s claim, though they had previously paid her Rs 2 lakh towards a settlement from the retiral dues they had received. The AMC continued to insist on a registered nikahnama. Justice M J Shelat found AMC’s insistence on proofs such as a photograph and mention in service records to be “unfathomable”. Referring to the maintenance application and the criminal case, the HC observed: “The corporation has erroneously overlooked such overwhelming documentary evidence which, in fact, constitutes material evidence to substantiate petitioner’s claim that she is the legally wedded wife of the deceased employee.” The HC directed the AMC to treat Farzanabanu as Shaikh’s legally wedded wife, prepare her family pension papers, and pass an order granting her the pension. The arrears of the family pension were ordered to be paid by May 15.
