Listen To This Post

New Delhi: The Delhi High Court has directed the Centre to release withheld pensionary benefits of a retired government employee and to consider inclusion of his live-in partner of over four decades and their children in the Pension Payment Order (PPO) for family pension and healthcare benefits.

A Division Bench of Justice Navin Chawla and Justice Madhu Jain held that the authorities had erroneously treated the employee’s transparent disclosure of his long-term live-in relationship as “grave misconduct”, leading to an unjust denial of post-retirement benefits.

CAT Order Set Aside

The High Court set aside a 2018 order of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), which had upheld the government’s decision to withhold 50 per cent of the petitioner’s monthly pension and gratuity after his retirement in 2012. “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 Bench said in its judgment dated January 7.

The court directed the authorities to release the withheld amounts along with interest at 6 per cent per annum, calculated from the date the payments became due till the date of actual disbursement.

Live-In Relationship Not Concealed

The Bench also directed the Centre to consider the petitioner’s request to include the name of his live-in partner and her children in the PPO for family pension and Central Government Health Scheme (CGHS) facilities.

According to the petitioner, his legally wedded wife had deserted him and refused to agree to a divorce. He thereafter began cohabiting with another woman in 1983, and two children were born from the relationship.

The court noted that the petitioner had consistently disclosed his marital situation and live-in relationship throughout his service, including in official records. It rejected the government’s allegation that he had misrepresented facts while applying for diplomatic passports for his partner and children.

No ‘Grave Misconduct’, Says Court

The petitioner had earlier faced disciplinary proceedings in 1990 for allegedly neglecting his wife and daughter, resulting in a four-year reduction in pay. A second inquiry was initiated in 2011, shortly before his retirement, culminating in the order to withhold half of his pension and gratuity.

However, the High Court observed that under the CCS (Pension) Rules, a pension can be withheld only in cases of “grave misconduct or negligence”, which was not established in this case.

“The record clearly establishes that the petitioner never concealed his relationship. He consistently disclosed the existence of his live-in partner and her children in the service records,” the court said, adding that there was no mala fide intent to defraud the department or obtain diplomatic passports through misrepresentation.

The Bench also rejected the disciplinary authority’s conclusion that the petitioner lacked personal integrity, terming it misconceived and unsupported by evidence.

Significant Ruling on Family Pension Rights

Legal experts said the judgment reinforces the principle that long-term live-in relationships, when transparently disclosed, cannot be treated as misconduct, particularly when they deny pensionary and family welfare benefits.

The ruling is expected to have broader implications for service jurisprudence, especially in cases involving family pension rights and recognition of non-traditional family structures within government service rules.