Reserved CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, JABALPUR BENCH CIRCUIT SITTINGS:BILASPUR Original Application No.203/881/2023 Jabalpur, this Friday, the 8^th day of November, 2024 HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE AKHIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON’BLE SMT. MALLIKA ARYA, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER Smt. Abda Begam, aged about 34 years, Daughter of Late Shri Umed Mohammed, Resident of Kashimpara, Near Learner's English Medium School, Bilaspur, Tahsil & District Bilaspur (C.G.)- 495004 -Applicant (By Advocate –Shri Nishant Bhanushali)

V e r s u s

1. Union of India-

Through the General Manager, South East Central Railway, General Manager's Office, RTS Colony, Railway Colony, Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh) 495004 2. Assistant Personnel Officer, The Senior Divisional Personnel Officer, South East Central Railway, Personnel Department, Divisional Railway Manager Office, Railway Colony Bilaspur, (Chhattisgarh) 495004 - Respondents (By Advocate –Shri Palash Tiwari)

(Date of reserving the order:-10.09.2024)

O R D E R By Justice Akhil Kumar Srivastava, JM;

By way of this Original Application, applicant has sought for quashing and setting aside impugned order dated 01.08.2023 (Annexure A/1) passed by respondent No.2 and to grant her family pension from the date she becomes eligible for the same along with arrears.

2. The facts of the case are that the applicant is the dependent divorced daughter of the deceased employee Shri Umed Mohammed who was working under the respondents on the post of Technician I, died on 05.02.2009 while in service. Applicant got married on 03.06.2004 with one Firoj Khan but customary divorce took place between them on 05.09.2008 by mutual consent. Since then she was residing with her parents. After the death of her father, mother of the applicant Smt. Jubeda Begam was receiving the family pension till her death as she expired on 09.11.2020 (Annexure A/4). Applicant made representation to the respondents for grant of family pension being dependent divorced daughter of the deceased employee. The same was not accepted and was directed to submit divorce decree from the competent court. Applicant filed suit before the Principal Judge Family Court Bilaspur on 25.07.2022 bearing Civil Suit No.671-A/2022 which was allowed vide decree 11.10.2022 (Annexure A/5). Applicant submitted her application dated 01.11.2022 (Annexure A/6) to respondents along with all relevant documents. The same was rejected by respondent No.2 vide order dated 01.08.2023 (Annexure A/1) declaring her ineligible on the ground that she filed the application for divorce in Court after the death of her mother and father and eligibility to obtain family pension as per rule is that the application for divorce is to be filed in Court during the lifetime of mother and father. Hence this Original Application. 2.1 Learned counsel for the applicant has placed reliance on the judgment passed by Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat in the matters on Union of India vs. Mayuriben Jani Daughter of Shri Durgeshbhai Nandlal Jani decided on 17.02.2020; order passed by Co-ordinate Ahmedabad Bench of this Tribunal in O.A. No.72/2019 on 21.08.2020 (Babita Brahmdev Madan vs. General Manager and others.)

3. Respondents in their reply have submitted that it is a settled principle that as per Railway Estt. Rule No. 152 of 2017, the applicant should've filed the application for divorce before the Court of Law during the lifetime of Mother and Father. But the applicant had filed the case for Divorce in the Court of Law after the death of her Mother and Father making her ineligible to claim the benefits of family pension. After careful consideration, respondents refused to provide the benefits of family pension to the Applicant vide dated

01.08.2023 (Annexure A/1).

4. Heard the learned counsel for both the parties and perused the reply of the respondents and documents annexed therewith. However applicant has not filed any rejoinder to the reply filed by the respondents to convert the averments made therein.

5. It is