UNION OF INDIA Vs. RUMA MAJI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned Advocates appearing for the parties.

(2.) Affidavit-in-opposition and affidavit-in-reply filed in Court today be kept on record. 3. Assailing the order dated 29th March, 2007 passed in O.A. 921 of 2006 and the order passed in review application being R.A. 25 of 2007 which was passed on 17th April, 2008, this writ application has been filed. The impugned orders read such : "29.03.2007 Heard learned Counsel for the applicant and learned Counsel for the respondents. 2. The applicant having been aggrieved for non-settlement and non-payment of arrear ex-gratia amount and family pension on account of death of her husband, who was a Railway employee has filed this application. 3. Learned Counsel for the respondents on instruction submits that the relevant form would be sent to the applicant shortly which she would submit to the concerned authority after filling up the same for taking further necessary action. 4. In view of such submission, the respondent No. 2 is directed to send the requisite form, to the applicant which be submitted by the applicant to the authority concerned after properly filling up the same. The respondents are directed to complete the entire process of finalization and payment of ex-gratia and family pension to the applicant within three months from receipt of this order. The applicant is at liberty to come to this Tribunal for redress, if he is still aggrieved. The O.A. is accordingly disposed of. No order as to cost..." "17.04.2008 Ms. S. Banerjee, learned Counsel for the applicants in the R.A. (respondents in O.A.) submits that the original applicant is not entitled to get ex-gratia and family pension simultaneously.

(3.) Perused the order sought to be reviewed. No error is apparent on the fact of the record. If by wrong appreciation of law or the facts order has been passed, that can be assailed before the appropriate higher Forum. This application does not fall within any of the provisions under Order 47 Rule 1 of Code of Civil Procedure Warranting review of the order. Accordingly the R.A. is dismissed. Consequently the M.A stands dismissed. No order as to cost..."