Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Santresh Rani vs M/O Railways on 22 May, 2025
1 Suppl. Item No.3 (Nainital)
0.A. No. 4875/2024 CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL Circuit Sitting at Nainital O.A. No.4875/2024 This the 22 ndday of May, 2025 Hon'ble Mr. Sanjeeva Kumar, Member (A) Hon'ble Mr. .l\iay Pratap Singh, Member (J) Santresh Rani W/ o Late Ramesh Singh, R/o Devrishi Enclave, Lane No.8, Dehra Khas, Dehradun, Uttrakhand, 248001.
... Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Piyush Tiwari) Versus
1. Union of India through Secretary, Ministry of Railway, Rail Bhawan, Raisina Road, New Delhi-110001.
2. The Chief Engineer, Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi-110001.
3. The Divisional Manager, Northern Railway, Moradabad Junction,Morad abad (Uttar Pradesh).
4. The Senior Section Engineer, Northern Railway Dehradun, Uttrakhand,PIN -248001.
...Respondents.
(By Advocate: Mr. T.C.Aggarwal) 0 R D E R (ORAL) As per: Ajay Pratap Singh, Member (Judicial) The applicant who is the wife of late Shri. Ramesh Singh, Ex-Technician-G rade I, Northern Railway, Dehradun by means of the present application has invoked the 2 O.A.No.4875/2024 jurisdiction of this Tribunal under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, seeking main relief(s) [As extracted from the OA) reads as:
"a) To quash and set aside the Order Dated 30.07.2023 which denied the petitioner's representation for ex-gratia payment in lieu of her husband's death in a railway accident.
b) To direct the Respondents to Grant Ex-Gratia payment to the petitioner in accordance with the applicable rules and regulations, considering the substantial doct,lmentary evidence provided, including the duty chart, official letters, Panchayatnama, and postmortem report, which collectively establish that the petitioner's husband was on duty at the time of the accident.
. c) To declare the Respondents' action as arbitrary, unjust and in violation of the principles of natural justice, in denying the ex-gratia payment, thereby entitling the petitioner to appropriate relief, including compensation for the mention anguish and hardship caused by the wrongful denial with interest @ 9%.
d. To pass any other order (s) or direction (s) as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.
e) That this Hon'ble Tribunal may be pleased to grant cost of the proceedings on favour of the applicant."
FACTS IN BRIEF
2. Briefly stated facts as adumbrated by the applicant are that the applicant is the legal heir and the wife of the deceased employee namely Late Sh. Ramesh Singh, who joined Northern Railway and held the post of Technician Grade-I. The respondent No.04-Senior Section Engineer Electrical, Northern Railway, Dehradun had assigned to thP / / Suppl. Item No.3 (Nainital) 3 O.A. No. 4875/2024 /4, ,. ~r.,,,"
11"),.
husband of the applicant duty of maintenance of Train No. .j u \:, 13009, 14631 & 14114 from 8 AM to 5 PM (Annexure A-2) at ~ Dehradun Railway Station. While discharging the duty of maintenance of Train No. 14114 at line 4, the husband of the applicant met with an accident due to which the upper part of the body was bisected and died on spot. The respondent No. 04(Senior Section Engineer (Electrical) Coaching, Northern Railway, Dehradun had lodged a complaint before the Station House Officer (SHO) GRP Dehradun relating to the death of the husband of the applicant while performing maintenance duty of Train No. 14114 at line 4 and same has been filed with the OA as Annexure A-3. The SHO, GRP, Dehradun had -conducted an inquest report under Section 174 of the CrPC for the unnatural death of the husband of the applicant and submitted inquest report on 02.11.2015 and the post mortem was carried out at Government Hospital, Dehradun at the instance of SHO, GRP, Dehradun. The dead body of the applicant was handed over to the applicant and was cremated on 03.11.2015. It is also the case of the applicant that she handed over all the required documents to the respondents for payment of Family Pension and Ex-gratia amount and also submitted representation dated 23.02.2018 (Annexure A-10) followed by another representation dated 11.08.2023. The respondents have rejected the claim of the applicant vide order dated 30.07.2023. In the impugned order, the respondents have stated that there was no conclusive proof on railway records confirming that the applicant's husband was on duty during the accident involving Train No. 14114. It is further stated in the impugned order that neither the Government Railway Police 4 O.A. No. 4875/2024 nor the Railway Protection Force registered the incident as on-duty incident and no statements were available from key personnel such as the Loco Pilot, Assistant Loco Pilot etc Further the Superintendent of Police, Government Railway Police/Dehradun and the Inspector In-charge, Railway Protection Force Dehradun stated that there were no records of the incident in their offices. Whereas, the respondent No. 04-Senior Section Engineer (Electrical) Coaching, Northern Railway Dehradun vide complaint dated
02. l l.2015(Annexure A-3) had reported the incident to the SHO, GRP, Dehradun stating that while performing maintenance duty of Train No. 14114 at line No. 04, the husband of the applicant met with an accident and died on spot. The applicant is entitled for payment of ex-gratia amount as the deceased husband of the applicant had died in harness while discharging official duties.
3. Per contra, the respondents have contended the claim of the applicant by stating that the impugned rejection order dated 30.07.2023 is just and proper and the representation of the applicant has been rightly rejected for want of sufficient evidences. So also, in the present case departmental enqui.ty report submitted by SP, GRP, Dehradun and Inspector in-charge of RPF, Dehradun, it has been found that there is no evidence to establish that the husband of the applicant died while performing official duties of Train No. 14114 at line No. 04 and the applicant failed to prove that the death of the applicant occurred due to said accident.5
Suppl. Item No.3 (Nainital) 0 .A. No. 4875/2024 SUBMISSIONS C • .
J:, ~ C:
:, Ill 4 • The learned counsel for the applicant contended and u -
can be summarized as under:
(i) The impugned order dated 30.07.2023 rejecting the claim for payment of ex-gratia amount as compensation to family employee who dies in harness while performing bonafied official duties is perverse, contrary to the RBE No. 136/2008 dated 30.09.2008 (Annexure A-7) as death occurred due to accident while performing official duties and is entitled for for payment of Rs. 10 Lakhs as ex-gratia lump-sum compensation. So . also as death occurred on 02 .11.2015 after 01.01.2006 and as per para (a) & 2 of RBE 136/2008 is entitled for ex-gratia payment.
(ii) The applicant's husband was working under respondent No. 04 and vide duty chart dated 02.11.2015 (Annexure A-
2), applicant's husband was assigned the duty of maintenance of Train No. 13009, 14631 & 14114 from 8 AM to 5 PM and while discharging the official duties, he met with an accident with Train No. 14114 on 02.11.2015 as evident from the complaint dated 02.11.2015 (Annexure A-3) made to SHO, GRP, Dehradun by respondent No. 04, which is not denied by the respondents and is an admitted fact.
The SHO, GRP, Dehradun had conducted an inquest report under Section 174 of the CRPC for the unnatural death of the applicant and submitted inquest report on 02.11.2015 and panchnama and the post mortem was carried out at Government Hospital, Dehradun at the instance of SHO, GRP, Dehradun. The dead body of the applicant was handed over to constable 708 Dinesh Rawat 1255 for post mortem on 02.11.2015 (Annexure A-4) . The rejection order denying 6 O.A.No. 4875/2024 ex-gratia amount based on the ground that no conclusiv e proof is available that the deceased employee was on duty and met with an accident with Train No. 14114 is contrary to the complain t dated 02.11.20 15 submitte d by the responde nt No. 04 and the inquest report submitte d by the SHO, GRP, Dehradu n (Annexur e A-4) and Post mortem dated 02.11.20 15 (Annexur e A-5).
5. The learned counsel for the responde nts contende d and can be summari zed as under:
(i) The impugne d order dated 30.07.20 23 is just and proper rejecting the claim of the applicant for payment of ex-gratia amount as applicant had failed or produce evidence to ·prove the factum of death of his husband in the accident with Train No. 14114 on 02.11.201 5.
(ii) The represent ation has been rejected for want of sufficient evidence supportin g the claim of the applicant that the applicant dies in harness while performin g official duties of Train No. 14114 on 02.11.201 5.
6. Undisput ed facts of the case are that husband of the applicant namely late Sh. Ramesh Singh joined Northern Railway on 03.02.19 84 and was working as Technicia n- Grade I and on 02.11.20 15 was on duty of maintena nce of Train No. 14114 from 08 AM to 05 PM on 02.11.20 15 at Dehradu n Railway Station. The husband of the applicant while performin g official duties of Train No. 14114 at line no. 04 met with an accident and die on spot. It is also an admitted fact that responde nt No. 04 lodged complain t dated 02.11.20 15 to SHO, GRP, Dehradu n that while on duty, the husband of the applicant met with an accident with Train No. 14114 on 02.11.20 15 and died on spot. On unnatura l 7 O.A. No. 4875/2024 death of the husband of the applicant, SHO, GRP, Dehradun submitted the inquest report dated 02.11.2014 (Annexure A-
4) and sent the body for post mortem. The factum of death in accident with Train No. 14114 on 02.11.2015 has not been specifically denied in the counter reply filed on behalf of the respondents as stated in paras 4.2, 4 .3, 4.4 and 4.5 of the OA.
7. The dispute in the present matter is the stand of the respondents that the applicant has failed to produce the evidence/ record to prove the fact regarding the death of the husband of the applicant in accident with Train No. 14114 on 02 .11.2015.
DISCUSSION
8. We have heard Mr. Piyush Tiwari, the learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. T.C. Aggarwal, the learned counsel for the respondents and have · perused the pleadings available on record.
THE ISSUE
9. The precise question for determination that arises-
"whether the husband of the applicant died on 02.11.2015 in harness while performing bonafide official duties?; if yes, whether the applicant is entitled for payment of ex-gratia payment as per RBE No. 136/2008 dated 30.09.2008?
RULE OF LAW
10. To appreciate the issue arising in the present OA, it will be necessary to notice relevant provision of RBE No. 136/2008 dated 30.09.2008-for ready reference reproduced as under:
8 O.A. No. 4875/2024"File No. E{W) 12088/ CP- l 7 New Delhi the 30th Septembe r 2008 The General Manager (Personnel) All Indian Railway, Pus, etc Sub: Payment of Ex. Gratta lump.um compena atton to the Families of Railway employe e who die in hame.. in performa nce of bonqffde official dutte..
Ref Board's letter No.E{W)/ 99/CP-1/ J dated 5-1 J-99 In partial modification of O.M. No 45/ 55/ 97-P&PW(C) dated I I Sept 1998 circulated under Board's letter dated th 5.11 . 99 under reference on the above mentioned subject, sub paras (a) to (c) under para-S of the DoP&PWs OM dated 11-9- 1998 since amended vide their O.M No 38/37/08-P&PW(A) dated 2.9.2008 may be substitute d and read as under:
aJ Death occurrin g due to accident s in the course of Rs.10.00 lakh performa nce of duties.
(b) Death occurring in the course of performance of Rs.IO.DO lakh duties attributable to act of violence of terrorists, anti social elements etc.
(c) Death occurring during (a) enemy action in Rs. JS.DO lakh international war or border skirmishe s and (b) action against militant terrorist, extremists, etc.
(d) Death occurring while on duty in specified high Rs. 15. 00 lakh altitude inaccessible border posts, etc on account of natural disaster extreme weather condition.
2. These order are applicab le in the case of Railway servants who dies in harness on or after l-l-2006 .
3. This has sanction of the President and issues with the concurrence of Financial Directorate of the Ministry of Railways. » (Emphasis supplied }
11. From the scheme of payme nt of ex-grat ia lump-s um compe nsation to the familie s of the railway employ ees who died in harnes s while perform ing official duties vide RBE No. 136/20 08 dated 30.09.2 008, it is clear as a noon day that if the death of the railway employ ee occurs during accide nt in course of official duties in harnes s on or after 01.01.2 006 as per RBE No. 136/20 08 dated 30.09.2 008, the familie s of the Railwa y employ ees is entitled for compe nsation as ex-grat ia payme nt.
9 0.A. No. 4875/202412. Another aspect of the matter i·s th t .
. a m para 2 of RBE No. 136/200 8 dated 30.09.20 08 it is specifically mentione d that these orders are applicabl e in the case of Railway servants who died on or after 01.01.20 06. It is an undispu ted fact that the accident occurred on 02.11.201 5.
13. We have already extracted the RBE No. 136/2008 dated 30.09.20 08, regarding payment of ex-gratia lump-sum compens ation to the families of the Railway employees who died in harness while performin g official duties. In the present case, averment s have been made in paras 4.2., 4.3 & 4.4. that the responde nt No. 04 /SSE (Electrical) Coaching has duly verified that the applicant 's husband was on maintena nce duty on 02.11.20 15 for maintena nce of Train No. 14114 at Dehradu n Railway Station and he met with an accident with Train No. 14114 on 02.11.20 15 and died on spot.
14. Complain t dated 02.11.20 15 (Annexure A-3) lodged by the Senior Section Engineer (Electrical) Coaching , Northern Railways, Dehradu n to SHO, GRP, Dehradu n and letter dated 30.10.20 23 (Annexure A-14)) for ready reference reads as under:
"Annexure N. 03 Office= S.S.E. V.Coaching Northeran Railway, Dehradun Dated: 02-11-2 015 From Incharge Police Station G.R.P Dehradun SUB: Regarding Duty of Sh Ramesh Singh Son of Kaluva Singh, T.L.Fitter 10 suppl. Item No.3 (Nainital) O.A. No. 4875/2024 The above menti oned emplo yee wcu on maint enanc e duty on Train No. 13002 , 14631 and 14114 from 8 am to l 7 pm. He wcu hit by a train on L' ,ne No. 4 during the maint enanc e of Train No.14114.
Received Origina l copy U203 CP Jitend ra Kuma r 2/ 11 /1 015 PS GRP D.In Sclxxx Sr.Section Engineer Elect (Coaching) N Rly., Dehradun• (Emphasis supplied}
15. The respo nden ts also start ed proce ssing the claim of the appl icant for ex-gr atia paym ent and vide orde r dated 30.1 0.20 23 (Annexure A-14) issue d to take nece ssary incom e.Res pond ents have also ascer taine d that dece ased empl oyed died in harn ess on 02.11 .2015 in Train accid ent. Lette r dated 30.10 .2023 read s as:
"Annexure No.14 Office of the Divisional Rail Manager North.em Railwa y Moradabad No.-E- Syaf Electrical/ Gura0/ I 18 Dated 30.10.2 023 C. Section Engineer Electrical/ Coaching North.em Railwa y, Dehrad un.
Subject: Late Shri. Ramesh Singh, Technician Grade-
1/ T. 1.
Regarding payme nt of Ex Gratia.
Reference:- M.R.P. /Personnel Letter No. 720-/ l 5/ Pensio n/ WCA Ex Gratia DDN/2 015 dated 19.10.2 023 In the above mentio ned matter , you are informed that Shri Rame sh Sing, Technician Grade-1n'.L Died after being hit by a train on 02.11 .2015 in an accide nt while on duty. In connection with the death due to accide nt while on duty, the personnel branc h had deman ded some forms. Please forward the inform ation sough t in para 2 to 8 of Personal branc h attach ed letter at the earlie st to Divisional office, so that necess ary action can be taken for payme nt of ex-qra tia compe nsatio n to the family member of the emplo yee as per rules.11
rsuppl. Item No.3 (Nainital) O.A. No. 4875/2024 Please treat it most urgent.
Sdxxx 30-10-23 Senior Divisional Electrical Engineer/ Sa.
North Railway, Moradabad"
(Bmphcui• mppliled}
16. The Sr. SSE (Electrical) Coaching, Northern Railway, Dehradun lodged a complaint with the SHO, GRP, Dehradun dated 02.11.2015 (Annexure A-3), in which it is specifically mentioned that the applicant was assigned duties of maintenance of Train No. 14114 and while discharging his duties and he met with an accident and died on spot. Whenever death occurs due to accident, suicide or any suspicious incident, the Station Police is required to conduct inquest report under section 174 of the CrPC. It is evident from the inquest report submitted by the SHO, GRP, Dehradun dated 02.11.2015 and details regarding injuries have also been given in the inquest report. The inquest report has been filed by the applicant as Annexure A-4 dated 02.11.2015, which specifically mentions that at 11:50 AM on 02.11.2015 an emergency telephonic communicatio n was given by the Station Master, Northern Railway, Dehradun and Constable Dinesh Rawat & Shailendra Rawat had reported to the place of accident and near Train No 14114 a t line No. 04, the husband of the applicant was lying dead and Panchnama was prepared and same was signed by Sr. Section Engineer, Northern Railways, Dehradun, Moradabad Division ( Electrical Section), Section Engineer, Northern Railway, Dehradun (Electrical Section) , Technician, Technician 1, Northern Railways, Technician 2 , Northern Railways & Hetcher, Northern Railways.
12"'suppl. Item No.3 (Nainital) 0.A. No. 4875/2024
17. The SHO GRP ' ' Dehradun sent the b constable D · ody through mesh Rawat for post mortem and the Government of Uttrakh d h .
an as issued death certificate (Annexure A-6) regarding the death of the husband of the applicant which occurred on 02.11.2015. The Death Certificate issued under the Birth and Death Registration . presumption Act, 2003 is a public d ocument and there 1s regarding the death of the husband of the applicant and the death certificate specifically mentions that the place of the death of the deceased employee is at Railway Station, Dehradun.
18. The factum regarding the death of the husband of the applicant in harness is well established from the inquest report dated 02.11.2015 conducted by SHO, GRP, Dehradun and the complaint dated 02.11.2015 lodged by the respondent No. 04, which states that the employee died while performing official duties of Train No.14114.
19. The applicant has made specific averments m para 4 .2., 4.3, 4.4. & 4.5 of the OA regarding the death of her husband while discharging official duties for maintenance of Train No. 14114 at line No. 04 and the respondents have given para wise reply and have submitted that same is a matter of record and have not specifically denied the factum of the death of the husband while discharging official duties.
20. Order VllI of Rule 5 of CPC specifically provides that if allegation made in the application are not specifically or impliedly denied are deemed to be an admitted fact.
21. The factum regarding death of the applicant while discharging official duties is well established and the 13 111- suppl. Item No.3 (Nainital) 0.A. No. 4875/2024 responden ts have not specifically den1·ed ·t d .
1 an same 1s an admitted fact.
22. So also, the Senior Divisional Electrical Engineer/' North Railways, Moradabad has communica ted to the c. Section Engineer Electrical/ Coaching vide letter dated 30.10.202 3 (Annexure A-14) stating that the husband of the applicant died after being hit by a Train on 02.11.2015 in an accident while on duty and in connection with the death due to accident while on duty, the personnel branch had demanded some forms. The present case is a open and shut case that the responden ts were processing the claim of the applicant for ex-gratia amount as evident from Annexure A-14 at page No. 78 of the OA but not paid till date.
23. In the case of Smt. Sarita Devi Vs. Union of India & Ors, in OA No. 906/2012 , decided on 28.09.201 2 by the Division Bench of this Tribunal reported in 2012 sec OnLine CAT, 2202, this Tribunal has allowed similar OA and held that "the applicant entitled to special benefits by way of grant of ex-gratia lump-sum compensat ion on account of death her husband while in service in course of employmen t."
24. We are of the considered opinion that the present case is also similar and issue is covered and no longer res- integra.
CONCLUSION
25. For the reasons stated hereinabov e and in our view whereof the issue is decided in favour of the applicant and against the responden ts.
Pis ' 14 ~ Item No.3 (Nainital) O.A.No.4875/2024 SUPP1· The imp ugne d orde r date d 30.0 7.20 23 1s not
26. and sust aina ble and here by quas hed and set asid e as husb rmin g of the appl ican t died 1n harn ess whil e perfo official mai nten ance duty of Trai n No. 1411 4 bein g bona fide duti es.
27. The appl ican t is held entit led to spec ial bene fits by way unt of of gran t of ex-g ratia lum p-su m com pens ation on acco official deat h of her husb and whil e perfo rmin g bona fide duti es.
-
28. The resp onde nts are direc ted to pay ex-g ratia lump law sum com pens ation to the appl ican t in_ acco rdan ce with ipt of with in a perio d of eigh t week s from the date of rece nts certi fied copy of this orde r, failin g whic h the resp onde ailin g shal l pay inter est on the ex-g ratia amo unt at the prev GPF rates .
29. Resu ltant ly, the -pre sent OA is acco rding ly allow ed m abov e indic ated term s.
30. How ever ther e shal l be no orde r as to cost s.
31. As a sequ el, pend ing MA(s), if any, also stan ds clos ed.
/"J
(Ajay Prat ap Sing h) (Sdn jeev a Kum ar)
Mem ber (J) Mem ber (A)
/Abha y/