PATASI DEVI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this petition, the petitioner has assailed the judgment and order of the Central Administrative Tribunal whereby tribunal has declined to grant family pension.

(2.) Counsel for the petitioner has contended that the petitionerwidow filed an application in the year 2007 before the CAT at the age of 72 years alleging that her husband was appointed on the post of Gangman right from 31.1.1958. The contention of the petitioner is that her husband performed service in the department upto 29.1.1979 for about 21 years and there was no complaint or inquiry pending against him.

(3.) Now it has come on record that after 1979 because of his absence, he has been removed from the service on 24.4.1980 which order was never served to the petitioner. It was further on 7.1997, it was informed to the petitioner that she is not entitled for any family pension/exgratia pension. The petitioner alleged that she submitted representations to the respondents and vide letter dt. 9.4.1986 issued from the office of Permanent Way Inspector, NWR, Sikar, the petitioner was asked to furnish an affidavit about missing of her husband since 7 years but the respondents gave no response except assuring that proceedings are running with the higher authorities. She contended that all through out she has made claims which were not considered and therefore, she has approached the CAT in the year 2007 which was decided on 27.10.2009.