JODHPUR, Dec. 14 -- The Rajasthan High Court, while dismissing a petition seeking release of family pension, observed that appropriate amendments to the pension rules may be required to ensure that provisions relating to nomination, dissolution of marriage and entitlement are transparent and unambiguous, leaving no scope for interpretational confusion. A bench of justice Farjand Ali said that the Advocate General is expected to bring these concerns to the notice of the state authorities for necessary action. The court made these observations while dealing with a dispute arising from competing claims for family pension following the death of a former officer of the Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation. Two women had claimed to be the legally wedded wife of the employee, leading to conflicting entries in the service records and the pension payment order. The bench reiterated that under Hindu law and service jurisprudence, there is no concept of a first or second wife during the subsistence of a valid marriage. The court said that only a legally wedded spouse is entitled to family pension and that determining the validity of a marriage involves disputed questions of fact, which cannot be decided in writ jurisdiction. It further clarified that nomination does not confer ownership or inheritance rights, as a nominee merely acts as a trustee for receiving pensionary benefits, while succession must be decided strictly in accordance with law. The court observed that issues relating to marital status and succession require a full-fledged trial before a civil court. It granted liberty to the parties to approach the competent civil court for a declaration of their rights....