ORDER

The present O.A has been filed by the applicant under section 19 of Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985 seeking following reliefs:-

8.1 That the Hon’ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to direct the respondents to allow family pension to the applicant w.e.f. 3.12.1992, the date of death to her husband in service, as per Hon’ble CAT Judgment in the case of Malatikar (Smt.) duly affirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, treating the deceased employee deemed regularized w.e.f. 3.12.1992 , the date of his death.

8.2 That the Hon’ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to allow arrear of pension since 3.12.192 to the date it is allowed to the applicant with the interest @ 12% per annum from the date this amount is due to the date the same is actually paid to her.

8.3 That the Hon’ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to allow heavy cost in favour of the applicant.

8.4 That the Hon’ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to pass any other order or direction which may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case so that the applicant may get justice.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the applicant is legally wedded widow of late Ganga Ram s/o Ishwari, who died on 3.12.1992, while working as temporary Gangman under the Permanent Way Inspector, Northern Railway/ Track Depot, Subedarganj, Allahabad. Deceased was appointed as Gangman on daily wage basis on 1.2.1978 in the Northern Railway, Allahabad Division. He continued to work as Gangman in the Track Depot, Subedarganj till his death on 3.12.1992. Temporary status was allowed to the applicant w.e.f. 4.11.1985. Unfortunately applicant died on 3.12.1992. Applicant worked in the department for about 15 years. By way of this OA, applicant has prayed to direct the respondents to allow family pension to the applicant w.e.f.

3.12.1992 from the date of death of her husband as per Hon’ble CAT Judgment in the case of Malatikar (Smt) and others Vs. Union of India and others passed in OA No. 1124 of 1989 decided on 8.10.1991 which was also affirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court.

3. Counter affidavit has also been filed by the learned counsel for the respondents stating that applicant was engaged as casual Gangman on daily rated basis on 1.2.1978. He was granted temporary status w.e.f. 1.11.1985 and while in service, he died before he got regularization.

Respondents vide order dated 13.12.2012 rejected the claim of the applicant for family pension on the ground that widow of the casual labour with temporary status is not entitled for family pension, as per law laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal NO. 4373-78 of 1997 Union of India Vs. Robia Bikaner and others.

4. Rejoinder affidavit has also been filed in which the applicant has reiterated the facts as stated in the OA and denied the contents of the counter affidavit.

5. I have heard Sri S.K. Vishwakarma, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Avinash Kumar Sharma holding brief of Shri A.K. Rai, learned counsel for the respondents and perused the record.

6. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant is seeking family pension on the ground that husband of applicant had been granted temporary status in the department and worked for more than 15 years before he died. He expired before he was regularized. Hence, he is entitled for the family pension at par with other Group ‘D’ employees.

7. Learned counsel for the respondents vehemently argued that no temporary status employee is entitled for pension until and unless he is absorbed against a permanent Group ‘D’ post. Since the deceased was not regularized before his death, hence widow of the deceased is not entitled for any family pension.

8. I have considered the rival submissions and have gone through the entire record carefully, including the written submissions filed by the parties.

9. In the case of Malatikar (Smt.