Central Administrative Tribunal - Lucknow
Santosh Kumar Aged About 26 Years Son Of ... vs Union Of India on 20 March, 2015
Central Administrative Tribunal ,Lucknow Bench, Lucknow. Original Application No. 332/00072/2015 This the 20th day of March, 2015 Honble Sri Navneet Kumar, Member (J) Santosh Kumar aged about 26 years son of late Amrit Lal resident of Vilalge Girvar Khera, Post Nawai,District- Unnao. Applicant By Advocate: Sri Sudhir Pratap Singh Versus 1. Union of India, through the General Manager, Northern Railway, Baroda Hosue, New Delhi. 2. The Divisional Railway Manager, NorthrnRailway, Lucknow Division, Lucknow. 3. The Senior Divisional Personnel Officer, Northern Railway, Lucknow Division, Lucknow. 4. Yard Superintendent, Northern Railway, Loco Workshop, Charbagh, Lucknow. 5. The Manager, Northern Railway, Loco Workshop, Charbagh, Lucknow. 6. Smt. Ramshree wife of late Amrit Lal, resident of village Harauni, Post Harauni, Luknow. Respondents By Advocate: Sri Rajendra Singh ORDER (ORAL)
By Honble Sri Navneet Kumar, Member (J) The present O.A. is preferred by the applicants under section 19 of the AT Act with the following reliefs:-
a) to direct the respondents to release the family pension and entire amount of service benefits of late Amrit Lal in favour of the applicant forthwith along with interest @ 12% per annum.
b) deleted as per court order dated 20.3.2015
c) Any other relief, which this Honble Tribunal may deems fit just and proper under the circumstances of the case be also passed.
d) Allow the original application with cost.
2. The facts of the case are that the applicants father was working with respondents organisation and died on15.11.2014. Subsequently, the applicant made a prayer for release of pension and entire amount of service dues. The learned counsel for applicant has also drawn attention towards nomination form so submitted by the applicant along with the O.A. and has indicated that the respondent No. 6 claims herself to be widow of the applicant whereas her name has not been declared in the nomination form/ parivar register of the respondents organization. Learned counsel for applicant has also indicated that he has also made a request for payment of retiral dues as well as appointment on compassionate ground through his representation dated 5.12.2014. Learned counsel for applicant has also categorically submitted at bar that he would be satisfied if a direction is issued to the respondents to consider and decide the representation of the applicant dated 5.12.2014 within reasonable period of time.
3. Sri Rajendra Singh, learned counsel for respondents submits that he has no instructions whether any payment has been made to the applicant or to the respondent No. 6 till date or not.
4. It is to be pointed out that the applicants father was working with the respondents organisation and died on 5.12.2014 and soon thereafter, he preferred a representation for grant of compassionate appointment and also for payment of retiral dues. It is also to be indicated that he has made respondent No.6 as a party in the O.A. In terms of Parivar Register/ declaration form given to the authorities, her name does not find place in the records.
5. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for parties and after perusal of records, I deem it appropriate to issue a direction upon the respondents to consider and decide the representation of the applicant dated 5.12.2014 for payment of retiral dues within a period of three months and till disposal of the representation, the respondents shall not make any payment either to the applicant or to the respondent No. 6. The representation so submitted by the applicant be decided in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date, the certified copy of order is produced.
6. With the above observations, O.A. stands disposed of . No order as to costs.
(NAVNEET KUMAR) MEMBER (J) HLS/-