Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 63 (0.94 seconds)

S Dhatchayani vs M/O Railways on 11 March, 2022

duly mentioning that family pension has not been sanctioned as the Pensioner's spouse is missing. Further it is submitted that the applicant ... employee/pensioner/ family pensioner that all payments will be adjusted against the payments due to the employee/pensioner/ family pensioner in case she/he appears
Central Administrative Tribunal - Madras Cites 4 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

P S Jailani vs M/O Communications on 5 January, 2023

Government of India, Ministry of Personnel, P.G & Pensions, Department of Pension & Pensioner's Welfare dated 14.09.2011 and on the basis ... distinction bwetween the Government servant and the pensioner, the family pension to the family of a missing pensioner would accrue with effect from the date
Central Administrative Tribunal - Madras Cites 3 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

P S Jailani vs M/O Communications on 5 January, 2023

Department of Pension & Pensioners' Welfare's OM dated 29.08.1986, would be applicable in the case of missing pensioners mutatis mutandis ... distinction bwetween the Government servant and the pensioner, the family pension to the family of a missing pensioner would accrue with effect from the date
Central Administrative Tribunal - Madras Cites 3 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

M Suseela vs Department Of Posts on 5 February, 2026

service as extra-departmental agent for qualifying service in relation to pension and the Division Bench of the Karnataka High Court proceeded on the basis ... pension. But we also find many of the respondents are missing pension on account of marginal shortfall in their regular service tenure. This should deserve
Central Administrative Tribunal - Madras Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

N Devaki vs M/O Railways on 7 February, 2020

Railway Service (Pension) Rules, 1993, she is to be granted pension and gratuity under the Railway Service (Pension) Rules, 1993 and not under Payment ... further contention of the applicant that as per Railway Pension Rules, monthly pension is admissible to a railway employee on his retirement from service after
Central Administrative Tribunal - Madras Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

G Jayalakshimi vs M/O Railways on 20 July, 2023

respondents that family pension to the family of the missing employee / pensioner may be sanctioned after a period of six months y 4of6 from ... hence, the applicant is not eligible for Family Pension under Rule 75 of Railway Services (Pension) Rules 1993. Hence they prayed for dismissal
Central Administrative Tribunal - Madras Cites 1 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

K Pugalenthi vs Posts on 13 December, 2024

lodged missing complaint to the Inspector of Police only on 10.04.2001 after 11 years and thereafter, gave a representation seeking family pension and appointment ... issued against a missing employee and he was removed from service, the claim for compassionate appointment and grant of pension were rejected on the ground
Central Administrative Tribunal - Madras Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Murugammal vs M/O Railways on 9 December, 2019

obtain the dcetails of pension paid and the date of stoppage of the same as per records of the deceased pensioner in the books ... detailed order regarding the missing of the records and the eligibility of the applicant for getting the family pension as per the new scheme within
Central Administrative Tribunal - Madras Cites 1 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 Next