Central Administrative Tribunal
LATA JAIDEO TEMBHURNE vs CENTRAL RAILWAY on 28 October 2026
Central Administrative Tribunal
Mumbai Bench Camp at Nagpur
Miscellaneous Application No. 1129/2026
with
Diary No. 2291/2026(O.A.)
Date of Decision: 28th October, 2026
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice M.G. Sewlikar, Member (J)
Lata W/o Jaideo Tembhurne,
Aged: 59 Years, Occupation: Housewife,
R/o Plot No.93, Meshram Layout,
Sumedh Nagar, Nari Road, Nagpur-26.
… Applicant
(By Advocate: Mr. N.R. Kanungo)
Versus
1.
Union of India,
Through General Manager,
Central Railway, Mumbai- 400001.
GM@CR.RAILNET.GOV.IN
2.
Divisional Railway Manager,
Central Railway, Nagpur-400001.
DRM@NAG.RAILNET.GOV.IN
3.
Senior Divisional Finance Manager,
D.R.M’s Office, Central Railway,
Nagpur- 440001.
SRDFM@NGP.RAILNET.GOV.IN
4.
FA & CAO (Pension),
Central Railway, Mumbai CST-40001.
SREDA.ADMN@RAILNET.GOV.IN
5.
Jaideo S/o Rajaram Tembhurne,
Age-65, Occ- Retired,
R/o C/o Shishupal Tembhurne, Plot
Rashmi
No.492, Sugat Nagar, Nari Road, Post
Jaripatka, Nagpur.
… Respondents
(By Advocate: Mr. N.P. Lambat)
Citations and Judicial Treatment
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…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORAL ORDER
Per: Justice M.G. Sewlikar, Member (J)
We have heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned counsel for the respondents.
2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant, being the wife of the pensioner has made following prayers:- “1. Direct the respondents 1 to 4 to grant half monthly family pension of her pensioner husband to the applicant, further direct the respondent husband to pay / deposit half the amount received by him on retirement in lumsum in the account of the applicant within a specified time & separate railway pass in the name of the applicant. Or Alternatively, Nil
2. Any other relief deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of the case may kindly be granted.
3. Allow the application with cost.”
3. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that this OA is not maintainable because the pensioner is alive. We made a query to the learned counsel for the applicant as to whether the pensioner is alive, to which learned counsel for the applicant answered in affirmative. When the pensioner is alive, the question of paying Rashmi half monthly family pension to the applicant does not arise. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that this application is filed as if the Tribunal is an executing Court of the Order passed by the 15th Jt. Civil Judge (Sr.Division) and A.C.J.M., (Spl. Court of P.W.D.V. Act), Nagpur.
4. When pensioner is alive, the applicant has no right to claim half of the pension. Her right arise only on death of the pensioner. Having regard to his, the application is not maintainable. It is a frivolous litigation. Hence, it is dismissed with cost of Rs. 3,000/- to be credited to CAT Bar Association, Nagpur. Accordingly, MA No. 1129/2026 with Diary no. 2291/2026(O.A.) stands dismissed.
(Justice M.G. Sewlikar)
Member (J)
nk. Rashmi