Back
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Amit Sahai, Member (A)
Pushpa – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of family pension denial and prior litigation. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. respondents' contention: widowed daughter precedence over unmarried. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. applicant's claim: father's nomination valid for ppo inclusion. (Para 6 , 7 , 10) |
| 4. family pension not estate; no nomination or inheritance. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 5. ppo omission due to authorities' negligence; dependency proven. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 6. elder widowed daughter's dependency unproven; presumed ineligible. (Para 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 7. grant family pension to unmarried dependent daughter. (Para 18 , 19) |
ORDER
Hon’ble Dr. Amit Sahai, Member (A)
1. Being denied family pension to the applicant as surviving unmarried daughter by the respondents vide order dated 03.10.2022 (Annexure A/1) and 06.07.2022 (Annexure A/2), the applicant has approached this Tribunal under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 for setting aside these orders and to grant her the family pension of her deceased father.
2. The facts in brief to adjudicate the case are as under:-
3. This is the second round of litigation. The first OA No.156/2022, was disposed of by this Tribunal on 11.08.2022, at admission stage, directin
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
