KANCHAN KUMARI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents-Railways.

(2.) The present writ petition has been filed claiming the following reliefs :

(3.) The short facts, according to the petitioner, are that the husband of the petitioner, namely, Late Sudhir Kumar was a Railway employee and was posted as Traffic Porter at Hajipur. On 24/12/2009 while he was discharging his duty at Railway Crossing No.54A at about 08:00-16:00 hrs, he had been bitten by a snake, as a result of which he succumbed to death during the course of treatment. Thereafter, a Joint Enquiry Report/Special Report issued by Senior Divisional Operating Manager, Sonepur and Station Manager, East Central Railway, Hajipur also confirmed the death of the husband of the petitioner in course of discharge of duty. The petitioner filed representations dtd. 24/9/2013, 22/1/2014, 25/3/2019 and 29/3/2022 before the authorities concerned for release of the lump sum ex-gratia compensation amount on account of death of her husband. When no response was received upon the representations, the petitioner submitted an application under the Right to Information Act, 2005, in response to which, she has been communicated vide letter dtd. 18/10/2021 issued by the office of Senior Divisional Personnel Officer, Sonepur that the petitioner had not instituted any F.I.R. and she had not got done the postmortem of her husband. It has been further intimated that the lump sum ex-gratia compensation amount payable to family of an employee after his death is not payable in the case of Late Sudhir Kumar, i.e., the husband of the petitioner. The petitioner has never been communicated any decision by the respondent authorities regarding her claim except what has been communicated in response to her application under the Right to Information Act. She again submitted a representation dtd. 29/3/2022 to the DRM (P), ECR, Sonepur and copies of the same have been communicated to Senior Officials of Railway but again no action has been taken. Thereafter, the petitioner filed an Original Application bearing O.A. No. 050/00426 of 2022 which was allowed to be withdrawn vide order dtd. 12/7/2022 with liberty to file fresh O.A. In the light of aforesaid liberty, the petitioner again filed O.A./050/00634/2022 before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna Branch, Patna. The respondents appeared and filed their written statements opposing the compensation/ex-gratia payments to the petitioner. The learned CAT heard the matter and rejected the claim of the petitioner as barred by limitation vide order dtd. 7/9/2022. Hence, the present writ.