SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 3836

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
MR. VARUN SINDHU KUL KAUMUDI, ACJ
P Vijayalakshmi – Appellant
Versus
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd – Respondent
O.A./99/2021



Advocates:
Sri B.Pavan Kumar, Smt.K.Rajitha, Smt.A.P.Lakshmi

The entitlement to family pension is governed by CCS (Pension) Rules, not contingent on nominations, affirming the rights of the widow and adopted children.

Headnote:(A) Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 - Section 19 - Family Pension - Applicants sought relief for sanctioning family pension and benefits after the death of late Sri P.Sudhakar, who died on 20.03.2019 - Respondents failed to process the application despite multiple representations - Court emphasized the entitlement of the widow and adopted son under CCS (Pension) Rules, 2021, and the necessity for the department to act on submitted documents. (Paras 1, 6, 25, 26)

(B) Pension Entitlement - The court reiterated that the entitlement to family pension is not contingent upon nominations but is governed by the CCS (Pension) Rules, which recognize the widow and adopted children as beneficiaries. (Paras 20, 21)

(C) Delay in Processing - The court noted the undue delay in processing the family pension application, which caused financial distress to the applicants. (Paras 6, 25)

Facts of the case:
The applicants, widow and adopted son of late Sri P.Sudhakar, sought family pension and benefits after his death while in service. Despite submitting multiple representations and legal notices, the respondents failed to act on their requests, citing procedural delays and lack of nominations.

Findings of Court:
The court found that the applicants are entitled to family pension and other benefits, directing the respondents to process the application within three months.

Issues: The main issues included the entitlement of the applicants to family pension and the procedural delays by the respondents.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the entitlement to family pension is established under the CCS (Pension) Rules, and the department must act on the documents submitted by the applicants without undue delay.

Result: Original Application allowed.

ORDER

PER: HON’BLE MR. VARUN SINDHU KUL KAUMUDI, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER

1. The present Original Application has been filed by the applicants under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, seeking the following relief:

“.....to declare the inaction of the respondents in sanctioning family pension and other death benefits arising out of the death of late Sri P.Sudhakar who died on 20.03.2019 while working as Telecom Technician, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and rules on the subject matter and consequently declare that the applicants are entitled for Family Pension and other pensionary benefits with all consequential benefits in the interest of justice and be pleased to pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.”

2. The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicants, are as follows:

i. Late P.Sudhakar, husband of the 1st applicant, worked as Telecom Technician, with HRMS No.199305459, at Ootpalli Telephone Exchange, Bodhan, Nizamabad District.

ii. Late P.Sudhakar, who was unmarried, married the 1st applicant herein who was the widow of his own brother, late P.Swamy, on 17.11.2011. The name of the 1st applicant is entered in the BSNL, MRS Card, dt.18.07.2013, as the wife of Shri P.Sudhakar. The only son of late Sri P.Swamy, P.Vinay Kumar, was adopted by late P.Sudhakar, as per the Registered Adoption Deed, dt.21.02.2008, with Registration No.5/2008. The adopted son of the deceased employee is the 2nd applicant herein.

iii. Sri P.Sudhakar, while in service, died on 20.03.2019, at Hyderabad.

After the death of her husband, the 1st applicant submitted representations to the respondents for release of pension and pensionary benefits, including the representation, dt.18.12.2019, which was a joint representation, filed by both the applicants herein. Since there was no response from the concerned authorities, the applicants herein caused a legal notice, dt. 04.02.2020, to be served upon the respondents. The respondents, vide their Lr. No.TAC/ Pen/ CCA/ Misc/ 2020/ 6758, dt. 13.02.2020, informed the advocate of the applicants, in response to the legal notice, that the PCCA, TS Circle, Hyderabad, did not receive any such case from the GMTD, Nizamabad, and that the recommending/ sanctioning authority in this case is the GMTD, Nizamabad. The applicants were advised to approach the GMTD, Nizamabad. In the meanwhile, the CGM Telecom, Telangana Circle, also marked a copy of his letter No.TAC/CA-1/PR/2017-20/58, dt.19.02.2020, which was an internal correspondence between the CGMT TS Circle BSNL, and the DGM IFA, Nizamabad, requesting to process the family pension case of Smt. P.Vijaya Laxmi and to intimate the progress of the case on or before 29.02.2020. Till date, the respondents have not sanctioned any family pension and other benefits to the applicants, because of which they have been put to severe financial stress and penury after the death of late P.Sudhakar.

iv. Hence, the OA.

3. On notice, Respondents have put in appearance through their Counsel and filed a written reply stating that –

i. Vide Lr., dt. 16.05.2013, Late Sri P.Sudhakar, TT, had applied for issue of revised BSNL MRS Card, stating that he had got married to Smt.P.Vijaya Laxmi on 24.03.2011. A copy of the marriage certificate, dt. 17.11.2011, issued by the Marriage Officer, Bodhan, is enclosed at Annexure-2. The office issued BSNL MRS Card, bearing No.1228, on 18.08.2013 (actually on 18.07.2013), by including the name of Smt.P.Vijaya Laxmi as his wife.

ii. Subsequently, Late P.Sudhakar applied, on 31.01.2019, for entry of the name of P.Vijaya Laxmi in the ERP as his wife. In response to the above request, vide office Lr.No.GMTD-NZB/HR&A/Corr. TT&ATT/2018- 19/73, dt. 25.02.2019, P.Sudhakar was directed to submit the reason for delayed intimation regarding marriage and also to submit legal heir certificate, within a month. But, on 20.03.2019, P.Sudh

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top