Saliha Begum vs NORTHERN RAILWAY on 16 October 2026

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

2. The Chief Works Manager, Carriage & Wagon Workshop, Northern Railway, Alambagh, Lucknow. …..Respondents By Advocate: Smt. Prayagmati Gupta

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

1. To quash the impugned order dated 08.09.2023 contained as Annexure No.A-1 to this OA, with all consequential benefits.

2. To release family pension with update revision to the applicant monthwise alongwith arrears thereof with effect from 26.04.2020 i.e. the date when mother of the applicant expired.

3. To release the arrears of family pension alongwith interest 12% p.a. from the date of due till the actual date of payment.

4. Any other relief, which this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit, just and proper under the circumstances of the case, may also be passed.

5. Cost of the present case.

2. The facts of the case are that the applicant’s father, Mohd. Rafi, retired from service on 30.04.1990 while working as Fitter Grade-I under the respondents and he was getting pension after retirement. After his death on 28.10.2010, the applicant’s mother, Nazma Begum, was in receipt of family pension. On the death of her mother on

25.04.2020, the applicant approached the respondents for grant of family pension. Not having elicited a response, she approached this Tribunal in OA No. 255 of 2023 whereupon this Tribunal, vide order dated 07.07.2023, directed the respondents to decide the fresh representation to be preferred by her. The applicant submitted representation dated 07.07.2023 to the respondents, but it was rejected by them vide order dated 08.09.2023. Aggrieved, the applicant has preferred this OA.

3. The applicant’s contention is that she is the widowed daughter of the deceased employee and that after the death of her husband, Mohd. Azeem, on 13.06.1992, she became dependent on her father; that she has not re-married; that in the family identity card issued to her father for the purpose of complimentary pass, her name is indicated as widowed daughter; and yet her claim to family pension has been denied by the respondents.

4. The respondents state that on receipt of the applicant’s application for grant of family pension as the widowed daughter, an enquiry was conducted by the Deputy Welfare Inspector which revealed that the applicant was married to one Bhallo on 15.02.1988 and had two children from the marriage; that the applicant’s husband died on 13.06.1992; that the date of birth of applicant’s second daughter, Nazia Azeem, was 13.06.1994; that the applicant submitted affidavit that her husband was known by two names, Mohd. Azeem as well as Bhallo and that the date of birth of her daughter was wrongly entered as 13.06.1994 and it was actually 13.09.1992; that the mention of the applicant’s name in the pass does not mean that she was dependent upon her father. They contend that the applicant was not able to prove that she was dependent on her parents and, therefore, she is not entitled to family pension.

5. Heard both the parties. 6.1 Perusal of the Welfare Inspector’s report dated 07.11.2021 filed by the respondents vide MA No. 1339-1340/2026 dated 13.05.2026 reveals that its conclusion, based on various documents cited therein, is that the applicant appeared to be dependent widowed daughter of her parents, Mohd. Rafi and Nazma. 6.2 The respondents have not been able to explain why they have rejected the applicant’s case despite the favourable finding in regard to the applicant’s dependent status recorded by their Welfare Inspector in his report. The respondents’ rejection of the applicant’s claim is, therefore, hit by the vice of arbitrariness and is unsustainable. 7.1 In view of the foregoing, this OA is allowed and the order dated 08.09.2023 is quashed and set aside. The respondents are directed to reconsider grant of family pension to the applicant as the widowed dependent daughter of the deceased employee and release arrears of family pension to her from the date due till the date of actual payment with interest as per the Bank rate applicable within three months of receipt of certified copy of this order. 7.2 Associated MAs also stand disposed of. 7.3 Parties shall bear their own costs.

(Pankaj Kumar) Member (A)

Warij Warij Yadav Digitally signed by Warij Yadav