Central Administrative Tribunal - Lucknow
Smt Alia vs North Eastern Railway on 26 November, 2025
CAT, Lucknow Bench OA No. 332/00271 of 2023 Alia Vs U.O.I. & Ors.
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
LUCKNOW BENCH LUCKNOW
Original Application No. 332/00271 of 2023
Order reserved on: 31.10.2025
Order pronounced on: 26.11.2025
Hon'ble Mr. Pankaj Kumar, Member-Administrative
Smt. Alia, aged about 42 years, widow of Late Irfan Ahmad, R/o
Bangla Bazar, L.D.A. Colony, Lucknow.
.....Applicant
By Advocate: Smt. Bhavana Gupta
VERSUS
1. Union of India, through the General Manager, North Eastern Railway,
Headquarter Gorakhpur.
2. The General Manager Diesel Locomotive Works, Varanasi, Uttar
Pradesh.
3. Assistant Financial Advisor/Pension Banaras.
.....Respondents
By Advocate: Sri B.B. Tripathi
ORDER
Per Hon'ble Mr. Pankaj Kumar, Member-Administrative In this case relating to grant of family pension to the post-retiral spouse, the applicant has sought the following reliefs:-
(i) Quash/set aside the impugned order dated 10.11.2022 passed by Opposite party no. 2 contained in Annexure No. 1 respectively to this Original Application and provide all consequential benefits to the applicant;
(ii) To direct the opposite parties to pay all post-retirement benefits to the applicant like family pension and other dues if any with complete arrears of family pension along with interest @18% per annum since due date till the date of actual payment.
(iii) To pass any other order or direction which this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit just and proper in the above circumstances in favour of the petitioner in the interest of the justice.
(iv) Award the cost of the Original Application.Page 1 of 7
CAT, Lucknow Bench OA No. 332/00271 of 2023 Alia Vs U.O.I. & Ors.
2. Aggrieved with the rejection of her claim for family pension by the respondents vide the impugned order dated 10.11.2022, the applicant has preferred this OA.
3. The applicant states that her husband, Irfan Ahmad, retired from service on 31.07.2002 and married her on 10.02.2007; the first wife of Irfan Ahmad died many years ago. The applicant states further that her husband died on 22.04.2021 and she submitted representations to the respondents for family pension which were declined by them on the ground that family pension was not payable to her as per rules. The applicant contends that she cannot be denied family pension as she had married Irfan Ahmad on 10.02.2007 as per the Nikahnama or marriage certificate attached as Annexure 3 to the OA.
4. Per contra, the respondents state that Irfan Ahmad retired on 31.07.2002 and at the time of retirement he had not mentioned name of any family member in the prescribed form and, accordingly, the Pension Payment Order (PPO) was issued in his name only. It is further stated that as per the Railway Board's letter dated 29.09.1993, as and when a pensioner marries or remarries after retirement, he is required to intimate the event to the Head of Office with attested copy of marriage certificate, but in the present case, no such intimation was given or document was submitted during the lifetime of the deceased employee. It is contended that after the death of Irfan Ahmad, the fact of his marriage with the applicant cannot be established and, therefore, the applicant's claim was not considered.
5. In the rejoinder affidavit, the applicant cites rule 50(6)(i) and rule 50(13)(h) of the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 2021 as well as T K Vijaya Kumari vs UOI (OA No. 517/2008), Sangeeta vs Department of Personnel & Training (OA No. 807/2022) and Bhagwanti vs Union of India (1989) 4 SCC 397 in support of her contention.
Page 2 of 7 CAT, Lucknow Bench OA No. 332/00271 of 2023 Alia Vs U.O.I. & Ors.
6. Heard both the parties.
7.1 In Bhagwanti (supra), Hon'ble Supreme Court held the distinction between marriage before and after retirement as arbitrary in the following terms:
"9. Pension is payable, as pointed out in several judgments of this Court, on the consideration of past service rendered by the Government servant. Payability of the family pension is basically on the self-same consideration. Since pension is linked with past service and the avowed purpose of the Pension Rules is to provide sustenance in old age, distinction between marriage during service and marriage after retirement appears to be indeed arbitrary... In most cases, marriage after retirement is done to provide protection, secure companionship and to secure support in old age. The consideration upon which pension proper is admissible or the benefit of the family pension has been extended do not justify the distinction envisaged in the definition of 'family' by keeping the post- retiral spouse out of it."
(emphasis supplied) It is evident from the above that a person who marries the Government servant after his retirement is entitled to family pension. It is noted that the respondents' stand is not that post-retiral spouse is not entitled to family pension. Their objection is that the deceased railway servant did not inform of his marriage and submit marriage certificate of his marriage with the applicant after his retirement and in the absence of such intimation the factum of applicant's marriage cannot be established to grant her the benefit of family pension. It is, however, observed that in view of the law laid down in Bhagwanti (supra), the substantive right of the post-retiral spouse to family pension is not extinguished merely because the deceased employee did not inform of his post-retiral marriage to the pension sanctioning authority during his lifetime. 7.2 The question which arises, then, is what is to be done if no intimation of post-retiral marriage was provided by the deceased employee to the pension sanctioning authority during his lifetime. Here, it is profitable to turn to the provision under rule 50(15)(i) of the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 2021, reproduced below: Page 3 of 7
CAT, Lucknow Bench OA No. 332/00271 of 2023 Alia Vs U.O.I. & Ors.
"(i) The claim of a member of the family of the deceased Government servant shall not be rejected on the ground that the details of such member of the family are not available in Form 4 or office records, if the Head of Office is otherwise satisfied about the eligibility of the member of the family for grant of family pension under these rules."
(emphasis supplied) It follows from rule 50(15)(i) of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 2021 quoted above that when details of a family member are not available in the official records, it is incumbent upon the Head of Office to not reject the claim of that family member for family pension simply on this ground; rather, in such an event, a responsibility is cast upon the Head of Office to satisfy himself about the eligibility of that family member for family pension. When the provision under rule 50(15)(i) of CCS (Pension) Rules, 2021 is read together with the ratio in Bhagwanti (supra), it is observed that the overriding consideration for grant of family pension to post-retiral spouse is the factum of eligibility irrespective of the fact whether the name of post-retiral spouse is entered in the official records and it is the responsibility of the Head of Office to satisfy himself whether the post- retiral spouse is eligible for family pension.
7.3 A question that may be posed at this stage is whether a provision of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 2021 would hold good in case of the railway servant who is governed by the Railway Servants (Pension) Rules, 1993. While at the first glance, it may not appear to be the case, it has to be considered that in the scheme of governance of pension matters of the employees of Union of India, the Department of Pension and Pensioners' Welfare of Government of India has the following mandate as per the Government of India (Allocation of Business) Rules, 1961:
"1. Formulation of policy and co-ordination of matters relating to retirement benefits to Central Government employees (Civil, Defence and Railway Pensioners).
..."
(emphasis supplied) It is evident from the above that in the matters of policy and coordination, the Department of Pension and Pensioners' Welfare has the mandate for Page 4 of 7 CAT, Lucknow Bench OA No. 332/00271 of 2023 Alia Vs U.O.I. & Ors. Central Government employees, including Railway pensioners. Now, it is the Department of Pension and Pensioners' Welfare which has notified the CCS (Pension) Rules, 2021. Therefore, the general principles of policy as reflected in the CCS (Pension) Rules, 2021 are required to inform the administration of the Railway Servants (Pension) Rules, 1993 to the extent they do not interfere with the unique and distinguishable provisions in the Railway Servants (Pension) Rules, 1993 tailored for the specific requirement for the railway servants. The procedure for grant of family pension to family of central government employee encapsulated in rule 50(15)(i) of the CCS (Pension) rules, 2021 is a general principle of policy which would apply to the railway servant as well for the reason that any other procedure to the contrary for the railway servant would be hit by the vice of arbitrariness, in my opinion.
7.4 Coming to the Railway Servants (Pension) Rules, 1993, it is noted that the Railway Board has issued instructions from time to time for administration of these rules. The relevant instructions dated 29.09.1993 issued by the Railway Board and cited by the respondents are reproduced below:
"Subject: Endorsement of family pension entitlement of post-retiral spouse etc., in the pension payment order of pensioners.
Attention is invited to Board's letter No. F(E)III/89/PN-1/7 dated 23.01.1993 notifying the orders of grant of family pension to the post-retiral spouses etc., from the date following the date of death of the pensioner. Procedure for endorsement of family pension entitlement of post-retiral spouse in the pension payment order of the pensioner has been under consideration and it has now been decided that the following procedure may be followed for endorsement of family pension entitlement of post-retiral spouse in the pension payment order of Railway pensioners:
(i) As and when a pensioner marries or remarries after retirement, he shall intimate the event to the Head of Office who processed his pension papers at the time of his retirement. He shall also furnish alongwith his application an attested copy of the marriage certificate from regional/Gram Panchayat/District Magistrate in respect of his post retirement marriage.
(ii) The Head of Office on receipt of the application mentioned above and after due verification where necessary, forward the papers to the Accounts Officer who will in turn arrange to forward these papers to the PPO issuing FA&CAO for issuing of corrigendum PPO. While forwarding the papers to the Accounts Officer, the provisions of clause 801(10) of MRPR as Page 5 of 7 CAT, Lucknow Bench OA No. 332/00271 of 2023 Alia Vs U.O.I. & Ors.
amended vide Board's letter No. F(E)III/89/PN-1/27 dated 18.09.1992 shall be kept in mind. When the pensioner does not any child or children from his previous marriage, if any, the post-retiral spouse shall be eligible for full family pension. Where the pensioner has any eligible child or children from another wife who is not alive, the family pension to the post-retiral souse and the child/children from the previous marriage will be authorized, in terms of para 801(10) of MRPR as amended vide Board's letter No. F(E)III/89/PN-1/27 dated 18.09.1992.
(iii) The corrigendum PPO shall be forwarded by the Accounts Officer to the concerned pension disbursing agencies through FA&CAO. A copy of the corrigendum PPO shall also be endorsed to the pensioner.
(iv) As far as children, including those born after retirement, are concerned, a fresh PPO will be issued as and when the turn of each child for receipt of family pension is reached as at present.
The application will be submitted in the attached proforma."
(emphasis supplied) It is seen from the above that the Railway Board's letter dated 20.09.1993 only prescribes the procedure for inclusion of the post-retiral spouse's name in the PPO and requires the railway pensioner to submit application with marriage certificate on his marriage or re-marriage post retirement to the Head of Office which processed the pension papers. It is noted that the responsibility for verification, where necessary, is cast upon the Head of Office concerned.
7.5 In view of the discussion in sub-paragraphs 7.1 to 7.3, the instructions communicated vide the Railway Board's letter dated 29.09.1993 (quoted in sub-paragraph 7.4 above) are required to be interpreted in terms of the ratio in Bhagwanti (supra) and rule 50(15)(i) of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 2021. The doctrine of harmonious construction of statutes and rules made thereunder also lends weight to the approach for reconciling the Railway Board's instructions dated 29.09.1993 with the rule 50(15)(i) of CCS (Pension) Rules 2021 in regard to the aspect of verification. Viewed in this perspective, it is held that the responsibility of 'due verification' cast upon the Head of Office vide Railway Board's letter dated 29.09.1993 is required to be interpreted in a broad manner so as to encompass the cases where the details of post- retiral spouse are not available in the respondents' official records. Page 6 of 7 CAT, Lucknow Bench OA No. 332/00271 of 2023 Alia Vs U.O.I. & Ors. 7.6 In conclusion, it is not open for the respondents to take the position that it is not possible for them to verify and consider the applicant's claim for family pension on the ground that the deceased railway pensioner did not intimate them about his post-retiral marriage with the applicant.
8.1 In view of the foregoing, the order dated 10.11.2022 is quashed and set aside.
8.2 The respondents/competent authority are directed to verify the applicant's claim for family pension as the post-retiral spouse keeping in view the marriage certificate (Annexure 3 to the OA) furnished by the applicant and pay family pension to the applicant, if found eligible, from the date due, within three months of receipt of certified copy of this order. 8.3 If the respondents/competent authority are not able to verify the applicant's claim within the period specified above, they shall pay family pension to the applicant after obtaining indemnity bond from the applicant till they complete the verification.
8.4 This OA is disposed of in above terms.
8.5 Pending MAs, if any, are also disposed of.
8.6 Parties shall bear their own costs.
Warij Digitally
signed by (Pankaj Kumar)
Yadav Warij Yadav Member (A)
Warij
Page 7 of 7