Family pension where there are two wives

Where a central government servant dies leaving more than one legally wedded widow, one family pension is divided equally among them under Rule 50(8)(c) of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 2021, notified as G.S.R. 868(E) on 20 December 2021. Two widows draw half each; three draw a third each. The rule divides a single family pension and does not multiply it, so the widows share one entitlement rather than holding one apiece, and it is one of the few express exceptions to the bar in Rule 50(7)(a) on paying family pension to more than one member of the family at the same time.

Only a legally wedded widow qualifies. The Explanation to Rule 50(6) defines “widow” and “widower” as a spouse legally wedded to the deceased government servant or pensioner, which throws the question back on the personal law that governed the marriage. Where that law permits more than one subsisting marriage, there genuinely are two widows and Rule 50(8)(c) applies. Where it does not, and the second marriage is void, there is one widow in law even though there are two women, and the second wife draws nothing.

The children of that void marriage are a separate matter, and they are entitled. Section 16 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 makes a child of a void marriage legitimate whether or not a decree of nullity has been granted, and Rule 50(9)(k) of the 2021 Rules gives the eligible children of a void or voidable marriage the share of family pension their mother would have received had the marriage not been void. They take that one share between them under Rule 50(9)(l), not a share each, which is the single most commonly misstated point in this area.

This article sets out the equal-division rule and its statutory home, the definition of a widow and how personal law decides it, the position of a Hindu second marriage under Sections 5(i) and 11 of the Hindu Marriage Act, the entitlement of the children of a void marriage and the two authorities on it, how the shares are actually computed and rounded, when a widow and a second household draw at the same time and when they draw in turn, how a share devolves, the treatment of a post-retiral marriage and of judicial separation, who decides a disputed marriage, the forms that carry the claim, and the floor, ceiling, enhanced rate and dearness relief that bound the divided pension.

Equal shares among the widows

Rule 50(8)(c) of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 2021 provides that where the deceased government servant or pensioner is survived by more widows than one, the family pension shall be paid to the widows in equal shares. The provision carries forward Rule 54(7)(a)(i) of the erstwhile CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 without changing the arithmetic, and it operates on the family pension computed in the ordinary way under the family pension calculation at 30% of last pay, or at the enhanced 50% for the enhanced-rate window.

The division does not change the total. Two widows drawing half each between them receive exactly the family pension one widow would have drawn in full. What Rule 50(8)(c) secures is that neither widow can exclude the other: each has an equal claim, and the pension is apportioned rather than awarded.

Rule 50(7)(a) makes this an exception, not the norm. The general rule is that family pension is not payable to more than one member of the family at the same time, and Rule 50(7)(a) lists the clauses that displace it: clauses (c), (d), (e), (f) and (g) of sub-rule (8), and clause (g), the proviso to sub-clause (iii) of clause (h), and clause (k) of sub-rule (9). Every concurrent payment discussed below traces to one of those.

Who counts as a widow

The Explanation to Rule 50(6) of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 2021 provides that for the purposes of that rule “widow” and “widower” mean a spouse legally wedded to the deceased government servant or the pensioner. Length of cohabitation, presence in the pensioner’s records, and the birth of children do not make a woman a widow for family pension. Legal marriage does.

That definition is the whole of the test, and it makes the personal law governing the marriage the operative question. Where the personal law permits a man to have more than one wife at a time, as Muslim personal law does, a second and further marriage can be valid and each surviving wife is a legally wedded widow, so Rule 50(8)(c) divides the family pension among them. Where the personal law does not permit a second subsisting marriage, the purported marriage is void and produces no widow at all.

The rules themselves put the question to the pensioner. Item 7(iii) of Form 5, the intimation regarding marriage or birth of a child after retirement prescribed under Rule 50(15), asks whether, where the pensioner has a spouse living in addition to the one proposed to be included, the marriage is valid as per the personal law applicable to the pensioner, and requires the details. The Department of Pension and Pensioners’ Welfare has directed that the legality of such a marriage be examined on the governing personal law, in consultation with the Department of Legal Affairs where the position is doubtful, rather than assumed either way.

A Hindu second marriage is void

For a Hindu government servant the position is closed by statute. Section 5(i) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 makes it a condition of a valid Hindu marriage that neither party has a spouse living at the time of the marriage, and Section 11 makes a marriage in contravention of that condition null and void. The marriage is void from the outset, not voidable, so no decree is needed to defeat it and no custom can save it.

A Hindu second wife married while the first wife was alive and the first marriage subsisting is therefore not a legally wedded widow within the Explanation to Rule 50(6), and takes no share of the family pension. The first wife remains the sole widow, and the order of entitlement in Rule 50(6) runs as though the second wife were not there.

The Department of Pension and Pensioners’ Welfare circulated the Ministry of Law advice to that effect in D.O. letter No. 1/39/86-P&PW dated 16 February 1987, which reasons from Sections 5(1) and 11 of the Act to the conclusion that any second marriage by a Hindu male after the commencement of the 1955 Act during the lifetime of his first wife is a nullity with no legal effect, that such a marriage cannot be validated by custom, and that the second wife is accordingly not entitled to the family pension as a legally wedded wife. Nothing in the CCS (Pension) Rules, 2021 disturbs that reading.

The children of a void marriage are entitled

The exclusion of the second wife does not touch her children. Section 16(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, as amended by the Marriage Laws (Amendment) Act, 1976, provides that notwithstanding that a marriage is null and void under Section 11, any child of such marriage who would have been legitimate if the marriage had been valid shall be legitimate, whether the child was born before or after the commencement of the 1976 Act, whether or not a decree of nullity has been granted, and whether or not the marriage is held void otherwise than on a petition under the Act.

The 2021 Rules give that legitimacy a home in the pension scheme. Rule 50(9)(k) entitles the children of a void or voidable marriage, along with the children of more than one widow and the children of a divorced wife, to the share of family pension their mother would have received had she been alive, had she not been divorced, or had the marriage not been void or voidable, as the case may be. Rule 50(8)(g) provides the same share where the surviving widow has no eligible child of her own, and Rule 50(9)(m) stops that share lapsing when the children holding it cease to be eligible: it passes to the children of the other widow, divorced wife or void marriage in equal shares, or in full to the sole remaining child.

The central position predates the leading judgment. Department of Pension and Pensioners’ Welfare Office Memorandum No. 1/16/96-P&PW(E) dated 2 December 1996, issued after consultation with the Ministry of Law, clarified that pensionary benefits will be granted to the children of a deceased government servant or pensioner from a void marriage when their turn comes, and stated in terms that such children have no claim to receive family pension so long as the legally wedded wife is the recipient of it. Both halves of that sentence still govern: the entitlement is real, and its timing is conditional.

Rameshwari Devi v. State of Bihar

The Supreme Court decided Rameshwari Devi v. State of Bihar on 27 January 2000, on an appeal by the first wife of Narain Lal, who died in 1987 while Managing Director of the Rural Development Authority of the State of Bihar. He had married Yogmaya Devi on 10 April 1963 while the first wife was living. There was one son of the first marriage and four sons of the second, born in 1964, 1971, 1972 and 1976.

The single Judge of the Patna High Court held that the second marriage was void but that the sons of it were legitimate under Section 16 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and were entitled to share the family pension and the death gratuity, while Yogmaya Devi herself was entitled to nothing. The Division Bench dismissed the first wife’s appeal on 23 April 1998, and the Supreme Court dismissed her further appeal, finding no error in that judgment.

Two limits on the decision matter for a central government case. The deceased was a Bihar state employee, so the Court was not construing the CCS (Pension) Rules; the ratio rests on Section 16 of the Hindu Marriage Act, which applies identically to a central government servant. And the Court also held that the absence of a civil court finding on whether the second marriage took place did not debar the State Government from holding its own inquiry into the marriage and acting on the result, a point taken up below on who decides a disputed marriage.

What Union of India v. V.R. Tripathi did and did not decide

Union of India v. V.R. Tripathi, decided on 11 December 2018 and reported at (2019) 14 SCC 646, struck down a Railway Board circular that barred the children of a second marriage from compassionate appointment except where the administration had permitted the marriage. The Court held that once Section 16 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 treats a child born of a marriage contracted while an earlier marriage subsists as legitimate, it is not open to the State consistently with Article 14 to exclude that child from the benefit, and that the exclusion was arbitrary and ultra vires.

The benefit before the Court was employment on compassionate grounds, not a family pension. The decision is authority for the proposition that legitimate children may not be split into two classes by reference to which marriage produced them, and that reasoning supports the treatment of a void marriage’s children in Rule 50(9)(k), but it did not construe any pension rule and did not decide the sharing question. It is cited here for what it holds, and no further.

How the shares are computed

The unit of division is the mother, not the child. Rule 50(9)(k) of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 2021 gives the eligible children of each mother the share of family pension that mother would have received, and Rule 50(9)(l) provides that where there is more than one child from a widow, a divorced wife or a void or voidable marriage, that share is payable to those children in the manner specified in sub-rule (9), which is one at a time in order of birth, subject to the ordinary conditions.

So a servant survived by a legally wedded widow and four eligible children of a void second marriage produces two shares of one half each: the widow takes one half, and the four children take the other half between them, the eldest eligible child drawing it until that child ceases to be eligible. He does not produce five shares of one fifth. The number of notional mothers sets the denominator; the number of children within a branch does not.

Rule 50(9)(m) closes the branch. Where the share payable to a child or children ceases to be payable, it does not lapse but becomes payable to the eligible children of the other widow, divorced wife or void or voidable marriage in equal shares, or in full to the single remaining child. The effect across Rules 50(8)(c), (d) and 50(9)(m) is the same in every direction: a share whose branch is exhausted is redistributed rather than surrendered, and the family pension is never left partly undrawn.

Rounding of a divided share

Rule 50(7)(b) of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 2021 provides that where the family pension is payable to more than one member of the family at the same time it is paid in equal shares, and that where a share contains a fraction of a rupee it is rounded off to the next higher rupee. A family pension of Rs. 20,001 divided between two widows therefore yields Rs. 10,001 to each rather than Rs. 10,000.50.

The proviso to that clause protects the ceiling. A family pension in excess of the maximum prescribed under Rule 50 is not allowed, and where rounding the fractions on division among two or more members would push the total above that maximum, the fraction is ignored instead. Rounding is therefore upward by default and downward only where the Rs. 75,000 ordinary maximum or the Rs. 1,25,000 enhanced maximum would otherwise be breached.

Devolution of a widow’s share

Each share belongs to a branch of the family and stays with it. Rule 50(8)(c) of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 2021 provides that on the death or ineligibility of a widow, her share becomes payable to her child or children who fulfil the eligibility conditions in sub-rule (9), not to the other widow. The conditions are the ordinary ones: the age limit for a son or daughter, the lifelong entitlement of a disabled child subject to the income test, and the income conditions for an unmarried, widowed or divorced daughter.

Rule 50(8)(d) covers the branch that has no one to take it. Where the widow is not survived by any child, her share does not lapse but becomes payable to the other widows in equal shares, or in full to the sole other widow. The order of preference is settled and runs downward first: a widow’s own children before the other widow, and the other widow only where those children do not exist or do not qualify.

Remarriage of a childless widow

Rule 50(8)(a) of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 2021 pays family pension to a widow or widower up to the date of death or remarriage, whichever is earlier, and states that eligibility is not affected by the amount of income from other sources. Remarriage ordinarily ends the share, and where there are two widows the share of the one who remarries devolves under Rule 50(8)(c) or Rule 50(8)(d) in the usual way.

Rule 50(8)(b) carves out the childless widow. On remarriage her family pension continues if her income from all other sources is less than the minimum family pension of Rs. 9,000 a month under Rule 50(2) together with the dearness relief admissible on it. The proviso stops the payment once that income becomes equal to or exceeds that figure, and the share then becomes payable to the other eligible member of the family. Rule 50(8)(k) makes it the duty of a childless widow after remarriage to furnish a certificate to the pension disbursing authority once a year that she has not started earning her livelihood.

Children of a divorced wife or of a wife who is not alive

Rules 50(8)(e) and 50(8)(f) of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 2021 apply the mother’s-share principle to two further households. Clause (e) covers a surviving widow without any eligible child of her own where the deceased left eligible children from another wife who is not alive: those children take the share their mother would have received had she been alive at the date of death. Clause (f) does the same for the eligible children of a divorced wife, giving them the share their mother would have received had she not been divorced.

Both clauses carry the same proviso as clause (g). Where the deceased is survived by a widow who does have eligible children of her own, that widow draws in the ordinary way and, on her share ceasing to be payable, it passes to her own children under clause (c) and sub-rule (9). The children of the other household then take their mother’s share when the children’s turn arrives, under Rule 50(9)(k).

A second marriage contracted after retirement

A spouse married after retirement is a family pensioner. Rule 50(6)(i) of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 2021 names the widow or widower, including a post-retiral spouse and a judicially separated wife or husband, at the head of the order of entitlement, so a second marriage validly contracted after the first wife’s death or a decree of divorce creates a full entitlement rather than a lesser one.

The pensioner must put it on record. Rule 50(15)(f) requires a government servant who marries or remarries, or to whom a child is born, after retirement to intimate the fact to the head of office in Form 5, with a copy of the marriage certificate or birth certificate from a competent authority. Form 5 itself asks, at item 6(b), for the date of death or divorce of the previous spouse with the death certificate or divorce decree attached, and at item 7(iii) whether the marriage is valid under the personal law applicable to the pensioner where a spouse of an earlier marriage is still living.

Rule 63(1)(g) closes the loop at the accounting end. On an intimation forwarded by the head of office after due verification, the Accounts Officer takes it on record and, if there is no child or children from an earlier marriage or if those children are not eligible for family pension, issues a Revised Pension Payment Authority including the name of that spouse as family pensioner in the pension payment order. Where eligible children of an earlier marriage do exist, the revision waits and the shares are settled on the pensioner’s death under Rule 50.

Judicial separation

A decree of judicial separation does not end a marriage, and the CCS (Pension) Rules, 2021 keep the separated spouse in the family. Rule 50(6)(i) includes a judicially separated wife or husband in the order of entitlement, and Rule 50(8)(h) pays the family pension to a surviving judicially separated widow or widower where the deceased left no child or children.

Rules 50(8)(i) and 50(8)(j) handle the case where children exist. Where the deceased left a judicially separated spouse with a minor child, or a child suffering from a disorder or disability of mind, the family pension is payable to the surviving spouse provided he or she is the guardian of that child, and it moves to whoever is the actual guardian if the surviving spouse ceases to be so; on the child attaining majority while remaining eligible, it becomes payable to the child, and after the child ceases to be eligible it reverts to the surviving judicially separated spouse until death or remarriage. Where the child had already attained majority but remains eligible, Rule 50(8)(j) pays the child first and returns the pension to the separated spouse afterwards.

Who decides whether the second marriage was valid

The pension sanctioning authority decides, and it does not have to wait for a civil court. The Supreme Court held in Rameshwari Devi v. State of Bihar, decided on 27 January 2000, that although no civil court had pronounced on whether a marriage between Narain Lal and Yogmaya Devi had taken place according to Hindu rites, that did not debar the State Government from making an inquiry into the existence of the marriage and acting on it to grant pensionary benefits to the children. The Court examined the inquiry the State had in fact held, in which two witnesses testified to having attended the marriage and further witnesses and documentary evidence established that the couple had lived as husband and wife, and declined to interfere.

The administrative route is the one set out earlier: the head of office examines the validity of the marriage on the personal law that governed it, using the disclosure in Form 5 where the marriage was contracted after retirement, and refers the question to the Department of Legal Affairs where it is doubtful. The distinction the rules draw is between the fact of the marriage, which the department can establish on evidence, and its validity in law, which turns on the personal law and on Sections 5(i) and 11 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for a Hindu marriage.

Recording the family and claiming a share

The family record is where a two-household case is won or lost, and the rules require it to be complete. Rule 50(15)(h)(ii) of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 2021 requires Form 4, the details of family, to carry every son or daughter whether or not eligible for family pension on the date the form is submitted, and to include the details of all children, expressly including those from a deceased or divorced wife or from a void or voidable marriage. Rule 50(15)(e) requires the government servant to submit an up-to-date Form 4 again with the pension papers before retirement.

Rule 50(15)(i) softens the consequence of an incomplete record. A claim by a member of the family may not be rejected on the ground that the member’s details are not available in Form 4 or in office records, where the head of office is otherwise satisfied about eligibility under the rules. A child of a second household left out of Form 4 is therefore not shut out, though the claim will take longer.

The pension payment order reflects the division in two stages. Rule 63(1)(d) requires the Accounts Officer to name the spouse in the order as family pensioner if the spouse is alive; the first proviso requires the names of all the wives with their respective shares in the family pension where the family includes more than one living wife; and the second proviso provides that where the family includes a living wife and children from a wife who is not alive, from a divorced wife or from a void or voidable marriage, only the living wife is named with her share, and after the pensioner’s death the Accounts Officer issues a revised Pension Payment Authority naming every member eligible on the date of death with the respective share, in accordance with Rule 50. A claimant then applies in Form 10, the claim for family pension appended to the Rules, to the head of office.

Floor, ceiling, enhanced rate and dearness relief

The limits bind the family pension as a whole and are applied before it is divided. Rule 50(2)(a)(i) of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 2021 fixes ordinary family pension at 30% of pay subject to a minimum of Rs. 9,000 a month and a maximum of Rs. 75,000 a month, and Rule 50(2)(a)(iv) applies a minimum of Rs. 9,000 and a maximum of Rs. 1,25,000 to the enhanced family pension. Two widows therefore share one floor: where the family pension stands at the Rs. 9,000 minimum, each draws Rs. 4,500 rather than Rs. 9,000. The minimum and maximum pension limits bound the pension as a unit, not the individual share.

The enhanced rate is divided on the same principle. Rule 50(2)(a)(ii) pays 50% of pay for ten years from the day after the date of death where the servant died in service, and Rule 50(2)(a)(iii) pays the same rate for seven years or until the date the deceased pensioner would have attained the age of 67, whichever is less, where death followed retirement. That enhanced amount is computed as one family pension and split into equal shares, and on the expiry of the window the family drops to the ordinary rate under Rule 50(2)(b), the shares moving down together.

Dearness relief follows the share. It is payable on family pension under Rule 52 of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 2021, and each widow receives it on the amount she actually holds. On a family pension of Rs. 20,000 divided between two widows, each draws Rs. 10,000 plus relief at 60% of that share from 1 January 2026, which is Rs. 6,000, for Rs. 16,000 a month. Relief is not computed on the undivided pension and then apportioned; the arithmetic gives the same answer either way, but the pension payment order records the share.

Bearing on the 8th Central Pay Commission

The figures that bound a divided family pension are 7th Central Pay Commission figures, and only the figures will move. The 8th Central Pay Commission, constituted by Ministry of Finance, Department of Expenditure Resolution F. No. 01-01/2025-E.III(A) dated 3 November 2025, will revise the pay on which the 30% and 50% rates are computed, and any revision of the Rs. 9,000 minimum, the Rs. 75,000 ordinary maximum and the Rs. 1,25,000 enhanced maximum will change what each widow’s share works out to.

The structure will not move with them. The equal division among legally wedded widows, the definition of a widow, the mother’s-share allotment to the children of a void or voidable marriage and the devolution rules are set by Rule 50 of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 2021 and by the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, and a pay commission revises neither. Any revised figure attributed to the 8th Central Pay Commission is a projection until the Commission reports and the revised rules are notified.

Related Articles

• Family pension
• Family pension calculation
• Enhanced family pension
• Family pension to a disabled child
• Family pension to a divorced and widowed daughter
• Family pension to dependent parents
• Dual family pension
• Special or liberalised family pension
• CCS (Pension) Rules, 2021
• Central government pension
• Minimum and maximum pension
• Dearness relief
• Additional pension in old age
• Death gratuity
• Gratuity for central government employees
• Residuary gratuity
• Nomination for pension and gratuity
• PPO and life certificate
• Pension sanction process and timeline
• Bhavishya
• Revision of pension
• Superannuation
• Old Pension Scheme
• National Pension System
• Unified Pension Scheme
• Department of Pension and Pensioners’ Welfare
• 8th Central Pay Commission

External references

• Department of Pension and Pensioners’ Welfare
• CCS (Pension) Rules, 2021 (pensionersportal.gov.in)
• Central Pension Accounting Office
• India Code (Hindu Marriage Act, 1955)
• Bhavishya, the online pension sanction and payment tracking system
• The Gazette of India

References

1. Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 2021, notified as G.S.R. 868(E) on 20 December 2021: Rule 50(7)(a) (family pension not payable to more than one member at the same time, and the clauses excepted from it), Rule 50(7)(b) and its proviso (equal shares, rounding up to the next rupee, and the fraction ignored where the maximum would be breached), and Rule 50(8)(c) and (d) (equal shares among more widows than one, devolution of a widow’s share to her own eligible children, and the passing of a childless widow’s share to the other widows).
2. Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 2021, Explanation to Rule 50(6) (widow and widower mean a spouse legally wedded to the deceased government servant or pensioner) and Rule 50(6)(i) (the widow or widower, including a post-retiral spouse and a judicially separated wife or husband).
3. Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 2021, Rule 50(8)(b) and (k) (continuance of family pension to a childless widow on remarriage subject to the income condition, and the annual certificate), Rule 50(8)(e), (f) and (g) (the share of the children of a wife who is not alive, of a divorced wife, and of a void or voidable marriage, where the surviving widow has no eligible child), and Rule 50(8)(h), (i) and (j) (judicially separated widow or widower).
4. Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 2021, Rule 50(9)(k), (l) and (m) (children from more than one widow, from a divorced wife, or from a void or voidable marriage take the share their mother would have received; the manner of payment within a branch; and the passing of a ceasing share to the children of the other branches), Rule 50(2)(a) and (b) (30% and 50% rates, the Rs. 9,000 minimum, the Rs. 75,000 and Rs. 1,25,000 maxima, and the enhanced-rate periods), and Rule 52 (dearness relief on family pension).
5. Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 2021, Rule 50(15)(e), (f), (h) and (i) (up-to-date Form 4 with the pension papers, intimation of a marriage or birth after retirement in Form 5, the inclusion in Form 4 of all children including those from a deceased or divorced wife or from a void or voidable marriage, and the bar on rejecting a claim merely because the member is absent from Form 4), Form 5 items 6(b) and 7(iii), Form 10 (claim for family pension), and Rule 63(1)(d) with both provisos and Rule 63(1)(g) (naming of the wives and their shares in the Pension Payment Order, the revised Pension Payment Authority after the pensioner’s death, and the revision on a post-retiral marriage).
6. Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, Section 5(i) and Section 11 (a marriage contracted while a prior spouse is living is void) and Section 16(1) as amended by the Marriage Laws (Amendment) Act, 1976 (legitimacy of the children of a void or voidable marriage).
7. Rameshwari Devi v. State of Bihar, (2000) 2 SCC 431, decided 27 January 2000 (the second wife of a void marriage is not entitled to the family pension or the death-cum-retirement gratuity, the children of that marriage being legitimate under Section 16 of the Hindu Marriage Act are entitled to share both, and the government may hold its own inquiry into the existence of the marriage without a civil court decree).
8. Union of India v. V.R. Tripathi, (2019) 14 SCC 646, decided 11 December 2018 (a Railway Board circular excluding the children of a second marriage from compassionate appointment is arbitrary and contrary to Article 14, given Section 16 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955).
9. Department of Pension and Pensioners’ Welfare, Office Memorandum No. 1/16/96-P&PW(E), dated 2 December 1996 (pensionary benefits to the children of a void or voidable marriage when their turn comes, and no claim while the legally wedded wife is the recipient), and D.O. letter No. 1/39/86-P&PW dated 16 February 1987 with the Ministry of Law advice that a Hindu second wife is not entitled to family pension as a legally wedded wife.
10. Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972, Rule 54(7)(a)(i) and its proviso, and Rule 54(8)(i), the provisions carried forward into Rule 50(8)(c), Rule 50(8)(d) and Rule 50(7)(a) of the 2021 Rules.
11. Ministry of Finance, Department of Expenditure, Resolution F. No. 01-01/2025-E.III(A), dated 3 November 2025, constituting the 8th Central Pay Commission.