Amit Kumar Mishra vs NORTHERN RAILWAY on 27 October 2026

1. Union of India through its General Manager, Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi.

2. The Divisional Railway Manager, Northern Railway, Hazratganj, Lucknow.

3. The Sr. Divisional Personnel Officer, Northern Railway, Hazratganj, Lucknow. …..Respondents By Advocate: Smt. Prayagmati Gupta

ORDER (ORAL) Per Hon’ble Mr. Pankaj Kumar, Member-Administrative In this case relating to appointment on compassionate grounds, the applicant has sought following reliefs:-

1. To quash the impugned order dated 31.12.2020 read with order dated 11.01.2021 and order dated 08.11.2024 (contained as Annexure no. A-1 & A-2 to this OA), with all consequential benefits.

2. To appoint the applicant on a suitable post on compassionate appointment.

3. Pass such other orders or reliefs as deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case in the favour of the applicant and against the respondent.

4. Allow the cost of this application to the applicant.

2. The facts of the case are that the applicant’s mother, Sarla Mishra, died in harness on 20.09.2020 while working on the post of Waterman under the respondents and left behind three sons, including the applicant. The applicant applied to the respondents for appointment on compassionate grounds, but the respondents rejected his case vide orders dated 30.12.2020, 11.01.2021 and 08.11.2024. Aggrieved, the applicant has preferred this OA.

3. The applicant’s contention is that he is the sole dependent son and is eligible for appointment on compassionate grounds as the family is in a financially precarious condition, but the respondents have concluded that the deceased employee had no remaining family responsibilities without any substantial evidence or any enquiry to support their conclusion.

4. The respondents state that the deceased employee’s husband had died during her life time and that after her death the applicant, who is married, applied for appointment on compassionate grounds; however, one of the applicant’s brothers, Abhinav Mishra, is already working in North Eastern Railway and that the deceased employee had completed all responsibilities, including education of her children, during her life time. It is further averred that the applicant’s name has not been mentioned in the railway pass issued to the deceased employee; so his dependent status is not established in terms of RBE No. 70/2014; and that the competent authority closed the applicant’s case on the ground that the applicant’s dependency could not be established.

5. Heard both the parties. 6.1 Perusal of RBE No. 70/2014 dated 08.07.2014 brings out the following provision of relevance in the present controversy: “Existence of a number of instructions as well as the issue of specific clause of dependency on the ex-Railway employee have been engaging the attention of this office for sometime. Accordingly, the matter has been reviewed by the Board and it has been decided that it should be left to the discretion of the family concerned in case of death of ex- employee to request for a job to either spouse or any child {whether son or daughter (unmarried/married/divorced/widowed)} subject to the condition that the concerned child will be the bread-winner of the family concerned. Further, for this purpose instructions issued by this Ministry vide letter issued under RBE No. 22/2014 dated 04.03.2014 be read in the same spirit. However, the dependent of an unmarried male/unmarried female Railway employee dying in harness/retiring on medical grounds, may be considered for compassionate appointment by the Railway at its own level, subject to the condition that the candidate proposed for appointment is shown as dependent on the ex-employee on the basis of documents such as inclusion/declaration of names in the pass or in Ration cards etc. The condition of inclusion in the pass declaration or Ration cards etc. is only a facilitating factor, and not intended to be a restrictive one. In the absence of any such documentary proof, the factual position regarding the extent of the dependency may be got verified by deputing a Welfare Inspector to inquire into the circumstances. The relaxation of time limit permissible in case of minor children of those employees who die in harness would also apply in the case of dependents of those who die as bachelor/spinster.” (emphasis supplied) 6.2 It is evident from the relevant provisions of RBE No. 70/2014 extracted above that the married status of the son or daughter of the Railway employee who dies in harness is no bar for consideration of such married son or daughter for appointment on compassionate grounds. Further, the documentary proof of dependent status of person seeking appointment on compassionate grounds in case of the Railway employee who was unmarried at the time of his/her death in harness based on inclusion of such person in the pass or ration card is only facilitative and not restrictive; and in the absence of such documentary proof, the extent of dependency may be verified through the Welfare Inspector. 6.3 Applying the above provisions to the applicant’s case, it is observed that absence of the applicant’s name in the pass or the ration card should not have been treated in a restrictive manner by the respondents and that his dependent status should have been verified through an enquiry into the applicant’s circumstances by the Welfare Inspector. However, no such finding on the basis of the Welfare Inspector’s enquiry has been placed on record by the respondents.

7.1 In view of the foregoing, the orders dated 30.12.2020, 11.01.2021 and 08.11.2024 are quashed and set aside. 7.2 The respondents are directed to conduct an enquiry through the Welfare Inspector to verify the dependent status of the applicant and based on such enquiry they shall consider and decide the applicant’s claim for appointment on compassionate grounds by way of a reasoned and speaking order to be communicated to the applicant, preferably within three months of receipt of certified copy of this order. 7.3 This OA is disposed of in above terms. 7.4 Associated MAs also stand disposed of. 7.5 Parties shall bear their own costs.

(Pankaj Kumar) Member (A)

Warij Warij Yadav Digitally signed by Warij Yadav