Allahabad High Court
ABHISHEKversusState of U.P. AND 2 Others
- Decided
- Bench
- HARVIR SINGH
Holding
The Family Court’s maintenance order, based on the husband’s income at the relevant time, is lawful and not liable to interference; the revision petition is dismissed.
Summary
The revision petition was filed by Abhishek, a Class‑1 GST/customs officer, challenging a Family Court order dated 23‑04‑2024 that awarded Rs 15,000 as maintenance to the wife (Opposite Party 2) and Rs 6,000 to the minor son (Opposite Party 3). The petitioner contended that the awarded amount was disproportionate to his monthly salary of Rs 93,458 and that the wife, being a postgraduate, could earn her own livelihood. The State, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, submitted that the petitioner’s income was correctly assessed based on his salary and dearness allowance, and that forthcoming revisions under the 8th Pay Commission would further increase his earnings. The Court examined the parties’ submissions and relied on the Supreme Court’s decision in Kalyan Dey Chowdhury v. Rita Dey Chowdhury (AIR 2017 SC 2383), which permits maintenance to be fixed on the basis of the husband’s income at the relevant time. Finding no illegality or infirmity in the Family Court’s order, the Court dismissed the revision petition, while leaving open the possibility for the wife to seek a fresh revision after the Pay Commission recommendations are implemented.
Issues considered
- Whether the maintenance awarded by the Family Court is excessive in view of the husband’s income
- Whether the revision court can interfere with the Family Court’s maintenance order
- Whether prospective salary revisions under the 8th Pay Commission affect the assessment of maintenance
Subjects
- maintenance
- family court
- revision petition
- income assessment
- customs officer
- 8th Pay Commission
- disproportionate maintenance
- Supreme Court precedent
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2883 of 2024
Abhishek
.....Revisionist(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 2 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Revisionist(s) : Bipin Kumar, Jai Prakash
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Mohammad Zakir
Court No. - 86
HON'BLE HARVIR SINGH, J.
1. This Court, vide order dated 11.2.2021 has passed the following order
:-
“1. List has been revised.
2. None appeared on behalf of parties to press this revision. However,
learned A.G.A. for the State is present.
3. List this case as fresh on 19.03.2026.
4. It is made clear that, if either of the parties does not appear on the
next date of listing, the revision shall be decided as per available
record.”
2. When the matter was taken up for hearing today, none appeared on
behalf of the parties to press this revision, as it was made clear that no
further adjournment shall be granted on the next date of hearing.
3. Heard learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
4. The instant revision has been filed against the order date 23.04.2024,
passed by learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court No. 2,
Bulandshahar, by which a sum of Rs. 15,000/- has been awarded to
opposite party No.2 and a sum of Rs. 6,000/- has been awarded to
opposite party No.3 minor son of the revisionist and the opposite party no.
2.
5. The revisionist in the instant revision has taken a ground that, the
revisionist though is a custom officer GST and he is a class-1 officer, but
has other responsibilities as well and therefore, the amount of Rs. 21,000/-
is on the higher side and disproportionate to the source of income i.e. the
salary of the revisionist. The revisionist further stated that the opposite
party No.2 is also post graduate and is capable of earning herself and the
CRLR No. 2883 of 2024
2
fact of matrimonial dispute has not been disputed, as much as the case
No. 226 of 2022 has also been filed/pending against the revisionist and
the allegation of adultery has also been levelled against the opposite party
No.2, but could not be proved in the absence of any credible evidence and
prayed that order dated 23.04.2024 is liable to be set aside.
6. Per contra, learned AGA appearing on behalf of the State submitted
that revisionist is an officer in revenue department i.e. custom and excise
GST and was getting a salary of Rs.93,458/- in the month of January 2024
and submitted thereafter, there is a revision in the salary of the revisionist
at the end of the year and also further on account of revision in the
dearness allowance, which is being hiked in the month of January and
July respectively. Learner AGA further submitted that the 8th Pay
Commission has been recommended by the central government and as
and when the recommendations are going to be accepted, the salary of the
revisionist is likely to be revised substantially. He also submitted that
award given by learner Additional Principal Judge, Family Court Pilibhit
is based on the income of the revisionist at the relevant point of time and
prays that no interference is called for in the instant revision.
7. Having considered rival contentions and the fact that the revisionist is
an officer in the custom department, the department of revenue of central
government and his salary was about Rs.93,458/-at the relevant point of
time i.e., January 2024 and therefore, the assessment of the income of the
revisionist is explicitly clear and therefore learned Additional Principal
Judge, Family Court based on the law as held by Hon'ble Supreme Court
in the case of Kalyan Dey Chowdhury Vs. Rita Dey Chowdhury
reported in AIR 2017 SC 2383, has passed the said order of maintenance,
which is in accordance of law and calls for no interference by this court,
as such no illegality or infirmity has been found in the order dated
23.04.2024. The instant revision is liable to be dismissed and is
accordingly dismissed.
8. However, it shall remain open to the opposite party No.2 to seek further
revision in the amount of maintenance, as and when the recommendation
of 8th Pay Commission are implemented in letter and spirits.
(Harvir Singh,J.)
March 19, 2026
Faridul
Digitally signed by :-
FAREEDUL HASAN
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…