PRABHAVATI DEVI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted

(2.) Heard learned counsel for the parties

(3.) The appellant herein is the widow of Late Bipin Kumar Rai who was a temporary Railway servant in this manner:He, initially, was taken in the Railway Establishment as a casual worker and w.e.f. 27-4-83 he acquired the status of a 'substitute'. According to the definition given in Rule 2315 of the terms and conditions applicable to 'substitutes' in temporary service, they are persons engaged in the India Railway Establishments on regular scales of pay and allowances applicable to posts against which they are employed. These posts may fall vacant on account of a railway servant being on leave or due to non-availability of permanent or temporary railway servants and which cannot be kept vacant.