Central Administrative Tribunal - Cuttack
P Mohapatra vs M/O Railways on 8 August, 2023
Cup PACK Pramila Mohapatra aged shout 7O years, Wyo Late Incraman} Mohapats Jamul Permanent resident of Vill Runia Samanterapur, POPS Nirakarpur, Dist. Khardha, Pin- ws ery s a.
ed eens neat apr, oad peroe fons ge, e Maes pars ret or shy For the Applicant: Mr & KR. Samantsinghar, Counsel
-Yersus-
Winion of tna, represented through the General Manager, E.CoR, Rall Vihar, At/PQ/PS: Chandrasek charpur, x Bhy ubanesy war, Dist Nhurda, Pin 7Si077, Divisional Railway Manager, £. » Khurda Road Division, Aty POSES: fatal, Dist- Khurda, pin ;
Sr. Divisional Personnel cH cer, BCoR, Khurda Road Division, AtsPO/PS: fatal, DNst-
Shurda, Pin -7 5205).
ar Section Enghieer, bCakRly, Kalupadaghat, AtyPd- Kalupadaghat, PS- Tangd, Dist. Khurda.
ww Respondents For the Respondents: Mr. S.flethy, Counsel Po fae saped: , saith ar me fans ote Ea oe eat 2 Mets ae pete ay wee Lo aE, At We ot hee ae say deo se eee Senn. oy J on. caal 'once aan wt Wane, pees it nn oS wn "deat Sn tone cae wth "hed Moon, eel cine ve oo ae ms er eet
- ; oe ss ren wee , shoot we preed aa wren Les bo "Sob cae3 As eat , one ied bees re > on 0 "and. Sou ; fos, bees, feet, yee Be wees, ee ted fy me ea wie oe Le * & :
ae el 4 ane. weds oe peg rh ". oon 3 4 wy feet Teie oo aad i rs ccd yep eee of, 'ah bee Nee pecs Rear 4 is. rete ae es, oe Slooad Laat we eee! we Pood nap ty Spoon a ene pepo ne ae sane, race 7 cance , ; WE Ra : Aone he ae baoied Geb ee : 23 0 ye ts Ge bey oS bas ys 3 ie cs yo. 4 gS "ft Seeker aes Seed pt an paps, fee we 4s were, on 4 "ae: % view oe Be aon we bas ze if os 7 on Bee, cn pee ad we, nots be Sos, Be awed. cane oe om, tty al aon, Voss seein ne * bow, nee? 7 A oy "ah i bead ry ee ao ny , a, ap a ed aah nae loa nk ada i oe Pn "eho me hoot ere eee 3 sae é otne? po xs veers oe ee bey " wen fe "he o ie 5 6 6 = SS » 2 & & yesh ' wee fey pee, Oi ww * Tags eh: yee pa Roe 'eit ned at : ae « 3 sine pes 5 % % 7 ' * , . 4 ss w A, oe as oe shoot seg B ay a omrt, oy 'ark oe had, ee ete me ei on pon pened ree pnt pe pen. SAAR end to eon es we Sal Pua By oR deat pa Sees "ef" ora, wee fey ¢ a Sey, $ Sis ba ve oe " a me o ee ra
- ° o, " Mie a ayes ¥ yen head 3 os wha paaaad eet z " me risk : py fyhs on nent om at Beer or Sat ee 'wad ws, rn get weree 'otal reas' .
4 aeene yet fen oon we fae "ed pee heed os eae righ, or st er 27, geet bad rad ; oe SS bee Lf stood 'chore epee yen oe Sees ae eet youd " $ret * wee ros aS , Cpe. yee "bead, s pte pA Fase ae z eps , oy), 2 ee os es os oe ea wt es es wen peat te ad ere ° os. if mm on aeaes "emery pee. rete ot nes fo poor, on, ?
Ff * free, ene? EL ages oA ad ay OA ot ; : oe oe os ee ape BH Be gt i ie as "
Sok Gone on " Neat Bos te tet "
aes bee ad "s oi = re oe Bal oh, am won ; Prost Poa pone wees, eee io ", aes yo wy BB oes Pes ws ne bert is a3 ew ed os fin ~ mo Faas pe . ee: : eae ar we, ate, Eee goa 7 #5: Ly wae ot neat see etc voor one, ¢ Gs pen wee Pon eeeel heat fae Say
- s nena, Sead as nf eed ms, 43 "y oe aaa 'en Ag nat, 'ata ML ates: beng fo tae Dood eg eee x. nie pees (pon ii Po Fc} ond vans a, ei "as 4 My < . a me ee, Pod tts x or) a3 ea 2 " cl as on oooe: oa od ory aes fens Ly ¥ ta t na ies pages ~ aS bee don bok nan me rege (ese: aa ¢ 6 Fant Peel heed eed ' Sct PL gs ae RARE ~ heel ye ins 'et we f ot whens o 506 eat eg Fant we ab hod Sad ; ifs g . ;
poet ad a es La at pa ' gee Bon cc sec ee Ss pos oo 2 oot one: Mae ory, my tat Zo a . 4 Pard ape Se " eens Shy % &, Seu tpn, * ny 'et eer as cage ven OP " Mow t oo, a is a RS : es = oa ae "= oe os j foe oy ag a y men PRE power Ne os Sexe? ft ye 02 ced soot oe cist ad a eg fn 4 bake. aig "ae, eee, , a on pet Son coed we " fede oS. Teanait tan bad foot sot rn tee Chen hen on, a ps ner i ay enen, ce can aS fete, a + . at % Pd jews, iad as an a "i fe wo wate we " epee oe bce ' Fe on need wy 'Noe, bee ? ¢ heb " j wee tapi oe Tash on e abn pees me, te et : Y B oe - € @ & 2 £ ¥£ & a pov weet Koad gover, oD. EN om Neate ENE S, Learned Counsel for any i ed at Annmexure-A/7, has submitted that a ret pe Qs baie Ssh.
an we or.
ee.
yet te Mas % ae wn cas e % pene:
tas eg es ea! es y w x ver fed paves Pes See for settioment of setiral dues for sustenance of Hfe and dvelihood of the saving family members of the deceased employee.
U2 espondent-Department caused an enquiry through Welfere Inspector on 1V.09.2995 for considering the request of the applicant for settlement of retival dues of her husband and providing employment assistance on compassionate ground. Thereafter, the Respondent» Department sanctioned and paid an amount of Rs. 27 66/- towards DCRG amount of her husband vide letter dated 15.11.1995 but nothing was intimated about the payment of family pension etc. Arcording to Learned Counsel for the Applicant, her husband appolited as Gangiman mn temporary basis and, therefors, as per Rules, "gen his death, the applicant was entitled to family pension and other retiral dues Including appointment or compassionate graund, Thus, nonpayment of family pension in favour of the applicant, after the at VOMELLLLLLELELLETE death of her husband, is not only de hors Rule on the subject, but also Constitatinn so ajse is in contravention af right ty Hip as a funsiements right enshrined in Article 22 Pthe Conshtutian of India. Hence, by Bewa © Samantasinghar Vs Union of India and Others in DA No, PeROLO and Hon'ble Gish Court of yo . Ez ee SE: Ss Se 4 ENS} os ae ey * ae Sriesa In the case of UOL and others Vs Smt. Manorama Pag, UO) " eye NES ae coe ae ok BME. "s sed Soon ga: bobs og VERY Rs eee t a Fuge eh . f2006) CLP 125, Learned Course: fot the applicant has prayed for the Re x refieF claimed in this O.A. ~ XE ~% soya : AWE EL CPSP ¢ Yee F HOKE "i Ser contra, Ld. Counsel appearing for the respondents opposes fee, wyen.
. wat fae Fhe arlene and haeret ar the very contention of the Ld. Counsel for the applicant and based on e the counter has submitted that the husband of the applicant was appointed as casual Gangman [OPO Gat reman} wel 27,07 1986 under the Permanent Wey lospecter, Kalupadaghst and hefore being rewuiarized, he expired on {S.07. 1902. fe has been submitted Uhat during the service fron 1986 to 1992, the husband of the applicant was Es Pas :
< Say Tye eatal net pesulayived and worked on casual measure { a his death. Ve feta:
Sushand was calculated ag 5 years 9 S years and, accordingly, the Gratuity CEE KEEEZZEEEEEE EXE \ \ iy tbe had mot possessed mininrur qualifyir pension familly pension was allowed) it has heen submitted that as per tes 8 4 oye Regd hy sevgis Sayward s TBarvies 8 Re Fs OF RANWWaAY SOPVice PPeERSTOA rendered by an employee af market or dally rate/wages cannot he treated as service for the purpose of pensionary benefits, Mince the husband of the applicant was warking as Casual Gangman and before being regularized he died, the applicant is pat entivied to family pension as per bett SL No. 83/1986 or appointment an compassionate wee een eround which was duly intimated to her by letter dated 2b. 1994. Lil. Counsel for the respondents has also denied the stand taken by the Lab Counsel for the applicant relating to taking her thuml: impression by the Welfare Inspector on 17.09.1985 for considering her case for campassionate appointment Accordingly, Lal Counse! for the respendents has prayed for dismissal of the DA,
5. in reply, Ld. Counsel for the applicant has submitted that the husband of the applicant after being found medically fit was appointed as Gangman temporarily in the Engineering Department of the Railway carrying the pay scale of 775-1025 /- and was enjoying all the facility as | allway employee as per rales. The admissible to regular/ter & hh Rule 1 Ub} of Rule respondents have paid the DCSG aoe Vo a py we renee, bee fess io nat Pred.
pe wed, A Nyaa
-snnit yt ye it serets oe if a yooh SS ¢ ae ?
"a "
tapplicable to the casual labourer with temporary status. His submitted that In view of Sub Rule Ralbvay Board has decided ta revise the provisions reguiating pension Sy ve
-
iv pew ne wy geet and grant of pensionary benefits to temporary railway servants and fenton also family pension te the deperlent family member. Next cc ye N ofthe Ld. Counsel for the applicant is that since the applicant's husband t ~ on oye =f Bert eyey SX x x had completed 6 years of qualifying service as temporary Gangrmian as yee Darin YS wine Po ane hark eiieed ds BAenece Hehe per Rule 20 & 22 af the RSCP} Rules, LS anc had died in harness, ihe applicant is entitled for family pension under Rule 75 and FOC1}{b) of Pension Rules. But the respondents without considering all the above aspects have reached fo a conclusion f Poa hat the applicant is net entitled to pension, which is Hlegal.
& have considered the rival submissions of the respective parties and perused the records. As per the rules, every regular appointment at the initial stage Is on prohation/temporary ane, which, subsequently, gets confirmed on successhal mipletion of periad of probation mentioned in the oy offer of appointment. [t is mot in dispute that in the event of death, while the employee concerned contivuing on probation /even putting in less t tha ol year of service, his legal heirs are Oo family pension and other service benefits, which a permanentfeonfirmed emplovee's fardly is entitled to. The basic question that arises for consideration in this case is as to whether & ro) Sie A re eee oe ed we She we Pred oy th Pe wee applicant's Tushanc appointment was temporary one/ in mature. In this regard, the Service Book af an employee is sacrosanct one upon which a view can be taken an the stetus of the employee concerned. The Service Book of the husband of the applicant was PEN d and maintained in the Raibvays. He was also allotted the PF Acceunt No. 719797, The applicant has obtained the Service Book of her husband through RTI Act, copy of which has heen annexed in the GOA at Annexure-A/? series. The first page af the Service Baok ple ced at running page 24 tof the OA speaks that the applicant before being "0 ated was medically examined and found At in Bes-one vide OM Ne. NA/1g98 dated 30.06.1986. The Service Book at ramming page 25 shows that he was appointed on 27.07.1986 in the revised scale of pay of Rs. 775-1025/-. As a normal rule, pay seals is allowed to an employee whenever his appointment Bs was made against a particular San ctloned past Service Book at pag He r a and 27 alsa shows that the applicant was granted The arnt ual Increrient sful completion of every year and further in yarious cole HY SOC mead + sabetantive t pest fern REE a nee, pee, 00h uy Fo any - ise Peg tee ORE Bake ges R es hy oe Syn F Wa: TEDW RP YD ORS Sti se red #h ux + - Bram the above, if is established that the very appointment of the ye establishment in a applic: * and was serving in pensions ustion of the ar oe jenny yee ' 1% particular scale of pay and, that, heen stated as "Ex CPO Gaman" and in the column 5, date of ene pen vet wae ee "
aah Me ws Wa wey we ae "em.
ieee wee are fete wes ie pes eet we vat we a ore camirmaiion if culuriged in Annexure-R/ 7 produced by the respondents. On 2 juxtaposing re: ading of the recordings made in the Service Book, as Hiscussed above, vissa-vis the arder under Annexure-R/ 1, especially when the employes conce ned Is % no mere, if cannot be held that the status of the ex-employes was pot temporary one but not confirmed and, as admitted by the respondents, the employee concerned had completed sis years fround off} service to the Raibwvay. Hence, upon his death, in the capacity af temporary employee, as per the rules, Ais legal heirs are entitled to family pension and other benefits admissible t confirmed employees. The above view also gains support by the order af this Bench in Basanta Bews eohamvniasmghar Vs, UOLS& Ors. (OA Na. 264/20 10 disposed of an eases as Gangman on Ty basis in pensionalde establishment with partic ote aa rina pan Sad oers ae stale of pay of the Railways not granted fanvily pensiun and other benefits, this Tribunal af ypficant was entitled te family pension, remanded the See phos HR ebay his death, the ag weet matter for recemsideration. Further, in the case of Gen. Manager, SE. Bathiway & Ors. Vs. Smit. Manorama Pati (supra), the Hon'ble High Court of Orissa after giving nece sary interpretation to mules have held that persons appointed as temporary Sellow Man In a particular pay Seale with annual increment aesinst the sanctioned past comes under A 3 the definition of rallw ny servant. and in terms of rule 18(3}, upon death = oa temporary railway serv orvant his family members are entitled to family pension and death gratuity. Relevant portion of the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Orissa is qaoted hereunder;
7. A peruse) of the Rules, 1993 which came into farce an Srd- Decernber 1998 shows that its application has been made to the following class of railway servant:
wer.
atte, fe aoe, re syant whose services was ke Introduction: of Pension Serwants on the isth day of CH) any tre au Dy Failway oe) sensionahle th Xt s 22 o he governed by 'able pal "vant wiht wus fn larmary, T8286 and did nat ont { , He ever red thy the State Rathvay Proviched i :
Fund {Co adibutoryy Ral mus UEPEeS GS? APS (iv] any person entering a railway service on or after the 16th YN , except a person who is appeinted on cantract ar re-mployed after superammuation or whose terms of appointment ts eyygrpe fy ern H roarrsricts rte Shy mean brary PERE ES HY p POV EE LO SES CEM Pay ¥s &. Admits tly, ane hus mare of the Opp. Party was appoint uf HA1970 as temporary Bellow M In a pay rticuk ay pray scale with usual annual increments ard therefore, Clause T¥ abave would be applicable in his case. Farther the definition of "rallway se rvant has been given in Clause 23 of Rule 3 of the Rules, 1993 which speaks as under Beewe "23. "Raflway servant" means a persan who is a member af a railway service or hokis a post under the administrative contrel of the Railway Board and includes a person who is holding the post of Chairman, Sinancial Cammissianer or a Member of the Ralhway Seard but does not Inchide casual labour oF person ent from a service post which Is mot under the administrative contral of the Res way Board to a service ar post which is umder such administra ay coming"
a ~ z = 5 :
Sy = x :
OLA Na: SOs FONE S4 af ¢ in wiew of the shows < 5 since Late husband af the Opp. Party was appointed' as "temporary Bellow Man in a particular pay scale with 3 annual Increments agaist me e S: anctioried post oF P Bello 'Man, he was rathy ay servant"
in harne 8 : amily 'shall be elisibhs fo < Same scale as .
Seryagreb pier pravided that in tenn porary YS family pension admissible & these rules.
The said provision is quoted as unser "SQ. In the event of death in harness of a temporary railway servant his family shall be eligible to famdly pension and death gratuity on the same scale as admissible to families af permanent ralhvay servants under these rules"
. Therefore, in the event af death during service of a to uporary railway employes, there is no distinction under the Rules, 19935 in respect of admissibility of the family pension between the temporary railway employee and a permanent raibvay employee and pension to the family ofa temporary employee cannot be denied on the gt round that the emploves had not attain ed the status of a permanent employes.
Therefore, We fF the opinion that the Tribunal has rightly held that the Opp. Party weld be entitled ta get farnily pension, We find no iUegality, tripropricty or manifest error of law In the impugned judgement and order.
in the above, the Writ Application is misconcelved and is therefore, dismissed in amine."
pees 'eat waren, tet ox x yt © CHSES PRISTY xs $ NEE, ex "afescoy therein. Ne et ros ea feos ro Fy tes pbhy Ce ay fal fee, a Poe ond oes oo ne
00) lands fet s Ss an, Sant cont ce nA peed ben vf yee oe Re oS pgension ete. In favour of ronthly family by lading 2 GaN ey sible dues in X ze yF + a a period a x aaa' Sand pad Fc eaa' ond _ a fee Seal rox:
aK Snot © ge, "at Ancd- ?
yee ee Sra cS we sop EX Fs alee ene vite Feel on. pete Soi. pees ae ee, ot Kees their own COALS.
PAs} ~ % AA > 3 ¥ AMDU AUS ', ¢ CPR :