Central Administrative Tribunal

URMILA DEVI vs Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd on 15 October 2026

Cites 0, Cited by 0

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

Cited by

0

Decisions in the index citing it

Cites

0

Decisions referred to

In this index

0

Of the decisions it cites

Overruled / Questioned

0

No negative treatment found

Loading the citing and cited decisions…

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PATNA Order Sheet Item no.: 9 O.A./1132/2019 (PATNA) [ FAMILY PENSION ] Court No.: 1 No of Adjournment: 30 Order Dated: 15/10/2026 URMILA DEVI Vs BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LTD

For Applicant(s) Advocate : Shri J.K. Karn.

For Respondent(s) Advocate : Shri T.N. Thakur, ld. Sr. CGSC for O.P. No. 1 & 3., Shri Subodh Kumar, l/c for O.P. No. 2, 4 & 5 appearing through VC mode. Order of The Tribunal Counsel for the applicant is present physically. Counsel for O.P. No. 1 and 3 is present physically and counsel for O.P. No.2, 4 & 5 is present through VC mode. Counsel for O.P. No. 2, 4 & 5 appearing through VC mode but his voice is not clear. He is directed to argue the case on the next date of listing through physical mode. Counsel for the applicant started his argument. During the course of argument he placed reliance on Annexure-A/3 with the O.A. which says that husband of the applicant Durganand was granted temporary status provisionally as R/M. In the appointment letter, it has also been mentioned that he will be granted confirmation in R/M cadre only after verification of paid vouchers during engagement period as labour which are under enquiry by the High Power Committee. If at any stage the work diary of labour card of any candidates is found to be false/forged the R/M status shall be withdrawn and shall be liable for removal from job after observing necessary formalities. The Tribunal put a query to the counsel for the applicant that provisional status of R/M of husband of applicant was converted into confirmed R/M before his death and if he died with the status of provisionally appointed R/M then in that case whether the applicant is entitled for family pension along with retiral benefits of the deceased Durganand, the counsel for the applicant submitted that he may be given an opportunity to submit the legal position on the above point. He requested to adjourn the date. Counsel for the Opposite Parties has no objection to the prayer. Prayer of the applicant is accorded to. List the case on 03.12.2026 for further consideration. Justice Narendra Kumar Johari Member (J) Binay Prasad ( ps )

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead