UNION OF INDIA Vs. KANTABEN B DALAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, the Union of India and the officers in the Postal Services Organisation have challenged the judgment and order dated 02. 07. 2007 of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ahmedabad.

(2.) THE respondent is the widow of a postman employed by the petitioner authorities. The deceased was proceeded for the charge of unauthorised absence for about five months. The disciplinary authority imposed the punishment of removal from service. After exhausting the departmental remedies, the deceased approached the Central Administrative Tribunal, which allowed the application of the deceased and by order dated 17. 01. 2002 directed the authorities to consider the Original Application before the Tribunal as a Revision Petition and to decide it on merits. Member (Personnel) Postal Service by his order dated 19. 04. 2002 modified the order of penalty for removal from service to that of compulsory retirement, in view of the length of the services already put in by the deceased. Thereafter, the deceased expired on 13. 11. 2005. When the respondent requested the authorities for granting her family pension, the authorities turned down the request on the ground that the deceased had not put in the qualifying service of 10 years and that he had put in only 7 years and 11 months service.

(3.) AFTER considering the relevant Rules and after hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the Tribunal allowed the application and directed the authorities (petitioners herein) to pay family pension to the present respondent with a further direction that if arrears are not paid within three months from the date of receipt of the order, the amount shall be paid with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of the order till the date of payment. While rendering the above decision, the Tribunal followed the decision of the Tribunal in Original Application No. 102 of 2004 (against which the petition is dismissed by this Court) taking the view that even if a railway servant retires after putting in continuous service of more than one year, but less than the qualifying service and dies thereafter, the case will be governed by Rule 75 (2) (a) and not by Rule 75 (2) (c) of the Railway Servants (Pension) Rules. Accordingly, the widow will be entitled to family pension. The relevant provisions of Rule 75 of Railway Servant Pension Rules, 1993 also have been found to be pari materia with the relevant provisions of Rule 54 of the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules. It is against the aforesaid decision that the authorities have moved this Court.