O. A. No.060/00167/2016. Case: Shashi Kanta Vs General Manager (P) Northern Railway and Ors.. Central Administrative Tribunal

Case NumberO. A. No.060/00167/2016
CounselFor Appellant: Mr. M.S. Rana, counsel and Mr. Lakhinder Bir Singh, counsel for the respondents.
JudgesMr. Sanjeev Kaushik, Member (J)
IssueHindu Marriage Act - Section 13
Judgement DateMay 16, 2017
CourtCentral Administrative Tribunal


Mr. Sanjeev Kaushik, Member (J), (Chandigarh Bench)

  1. The applicant has impugned order dated 07.10.2015 (Annexure A-4) passed by respondent No.3, whereby her case for grant of family pension being 3rd beneficiary has been rejected and order dated 17.12.2015 (Annexure A-6), whereby her appeal has also been rejected. She has further sought direction from this Tribunal to direct the respondent to grant her family pension being divorcee daughter as third beneficiary, dependent upon Railway employee from the date of her entitlement and also award 18% interest per annum from the due date.

  2. To unfold controversy involved in this O.A. minimum facts which are necessary to note down here are that the applicant is a divorcee daughter of late Sh. Shiv Singh who retired as Attendant from Railway Hospital, Jalandhar on 30.06.1980. The mother of the applicant also died on 29.12.1994. Applicant got married to one Sh. Chaman Lal on 02.3.1999. As per averment made in the O.A. applicant got divorce before Panchayat on 10.04.2000 and thereafter she was residing with her father being dependent upon him who unfortunately expired on 18.09.2000. The applicant being eligible for grant of family pension being divorced daughter of deceased employee as per Railway Board letter 152/2006 dated 13.10.2006 submitted her claim. When the same was not considered by the respondents, she was compelled to approach this Court by filing O.A. No.060/00475/2015, which was disposed of on 29.05.2015, with a direction to the respondents to consider and take a final view in the matter in accordance with law. It is in pursuance thereto, the respondents have rejected her claim on 07.10.2015 against which the applicant preferred appeal on 17.11.2015, which too was dismissed on 17.12.2015. Hence this O.A.

  3. Mr. Rana, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant in furtherance to above plea vehemently argued that the impugned orders are liable to be quashed for the simple reason that before the death of the applicants father, she got divorce from her husband with mutual consent on 10.04.2000 before Panchayat and thereafter, she was residing with her father and being dependent, she is fully eligible in terms of rule formation for family pension being divorced daughter. Since the respondents did not recognize divorce decree, she was forced to file petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act for getting divorce and Ex-parte decree had been granted on 18.10.2014...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT