ORDER

Per: Hina P. Shah, Judicial Member The present Original Application has been filed by the applicant under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 seeking for the following reliefs:- “In view of the facts and grounds stated above in para 4 and 5, applicant prays that the impugned order Annexure-A/1 dt. 22.5.2014 may kindly be quashed and set aside and the respondent railway be directed: -

(i). To regularize the services of the husband of the applicant in pursuance to the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of All India Railway Parcel and Porters Union vs. UOI and Ors and treating the husband of the applicant as a regular employee, pensioner benefits be given to the applicant;

(ii) To give compensation to the applicant after treating the husband of the applicant as a regular railway employees; and (iii) To give compassionate appointment to the applicant.

Any other appropriate relief which this Hon’ble Tribunal may feel proper and just in the facts and circumstances of the case may also kindly be allowed in favour of the applicant.” 2(a). The brief facts of the case, as stated by the applicant, is that her late husband, Shri Karan Singh was working as Parcel Porter with the respondents at Nagaur Railway Station since 16.04.1993 till he expired on 15.02.2014 after he met with an accident with a goods train. During his life time, he has filed a case before the competent forum and the same, subsequently, reached upto the Hon’ble Supreme Court. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of All India Railway Parcel & Goods Porters’ Union vs. Union of India & Ors., vide its order dated 22.08.2003, issued directions to the Railway Administration to absorb them permanently and regularize their services. However, since the Railways were reluctant to implement the said judgment, the husband of the applicant along with other similarly situated employees approached the Principal Bench of this Tribunal by way of filing OA No. 1765/2010, which was disposed of vide its order dated 09.07.2010 with the directions to the Railways to consider and expedite the matter of regularization of the applicants therein and pass necessary orders. But the Railways did not issue any orders in favour of her husband.

2(b). Applicant further states that after death of her husband, she sent several representations to several authorities including Railways and Labour Commissioner stating that her husband has died while on duty on 15.02.2014 in an accident. It is her claim that since Railways have not implemented the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and Principal Bench of this Tribunal, she may be given compassionate appointment in view of judgments of Hon’ble Supreme Court and Principal Bench of this Tribunal.

Vide order dated 11.04.2014, Labour Commissioner directed the Sr. DPO, NWR, Jodhpur to consider the representation of applicant and pass necessary orders. Vide letter dated 22.05.2014 received from the office of Sr. DPO, NWR, Jodhpur, it was stated that since the husband of the applicant was working with the contractor on contract basis, compensation cannot be given to her and her claim was rejected. Thereafter, she served a legal notice dated 06.08.2014 to the respondents, but since her grievances were not redressed by the Railways, she has approached this Bench of the Tribunal.

3(a). After issue of notices, respondents have filed their reply raising preliminary objection stating that the husband of the applicant was neither an employee of respondents-Railways nor directly engaged by the respondent-department.

There is neither any agreement nor any contract with the applicant’s husband and the railway-department; rather the contract was signed by the contractor, Shri Shahbuddin Sindhi, who appointed the applicant for performing work of loading and unloading of the goods from the railway parcels and payment was done to the applicant through the said contractor. Thus, there was no direct ne