T. S. THAKUR, J. ( 1 ) ISSUE Rule. With consent, the petition has been heard for final disposal. ( 2 ) LATE Subedar and Honorary Lieutenant Bani Singh was receiving service pension in terms of a Pension Pay Order dated 14th December, 1987 w. e. f. 1st april, 1988. The deceased appears to have contracted a second marriage after he superannuated from military service and begotten two female children out of the wed lock. After his demise, the respondents were approached to process the pension papers of the two widows left behind by him who are the petitioners before us. Since nothing fruitful appears to have been done in that direction, the petitioners have filed the present writ petition in which they have sought a mandamus directing the respondents to finalize the ordinary family pension claim in favour of either one of the petitioners expeditiously and to remit the arrears of pension payable to their account. ( 3 ) APPEARING for the petitioners, Mr. Kauntae submitted that while petitioner no. 1 is the first widow of the deceased Subedar Bani Singh, petitioner no. 2 was married to Bani Singh after his superannuation with the consent of petitioner no. 1. He urged that since the second marriage was contracted with the consent of the first living spouse of Bani Singh, the respondents could consider her claim for grant of family pension upon the demise of Bani Singh. It was further submitted that if the respondents did not recognize the claim of the petitioner no. 2 for any reason, the children born out of the second bedlock between Late Bani Singh and petitioner no. 2 could be considered for grant of the benefit in terms of the Rules and the standing orders, if any on the subject. ( 4 ) ON behalf of the respondents, it was submitted by Ms. Mathur, counsel appearing for the respondents, that insofar as the second marriage between Bani singh and petitioner no. 2 was concerned, the same was contrary to the provisions of Hindu Marriage Act and cannot, therefore, be recognized for any purpose including grant of pensionary benefits to her. She submitted on instructions that the pensionary claim of petitioner no. 1, Smt. Phoolpati, could, however, be processed by the authorities within such time as may be fixed by the Court, if not already finalized. She submitted on instructions that the pensionary claim of petitioner no. 1, Smt. Phoolpati, could, however, be processed by the authorities within such time as may be fixed by the Court, if not already finalized. She further stated that there was no claim as on present before the respondents on behalf of the children born out of the second marriage for grant of any pensionary benefits nor did the writ petition claim any relief in that regard. In case, however, the children were keen to make any such claim they could do so through their mother, petitioner no. 2, under whose guardianship they are presently stated to be living. ( 5 ) IN the circumstances, therefore, and keeping in view the submissions made at the bar, we see no reason why the respondents should not examine and expeditiously process the claim for payment of family pension in favour of petitioner no. 1 who is the lawfully married wife of the deceased Subedar Bani singh. Insofar as the claim made by petitioner no. 2 is concerned, Mr. Kauntae counsel appearing for the said petitioner fairly conceded that since a question mark has been put on the legitimacy of the second marriage, the claim made by her for payment of pension may be taken as not pressed. He, however, sought liberty for petitioner no. 2 to make a claim on behalf of her minor children for grant of pensionary benefits which claim, the respondents shall examine and suitably dispose of in accordance with the Rules and Regulations. The needful shall be done expeditiously but not later than four months from the date a representation is made to the Principal Controller of Defence Accounts through officer-in-charge Records, Jat Regiment. Representation to be made within four weeks from today. No Costs.