Denial of compassionate allowance upheld due to prior misconduct and lack of compelling circumstances, with final decisions in disciplinary actions deemed conclusive.

ORDER

Per Mr. Suchitto Kumar Das, Administrative Member :

1. This matter is taken up by Single Bench in view of the revised list dated 04.04.2000 issued under Sub section (6) of Section 5 of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985 and as no complicated question of law is involved this matter is taken up for disposal.

2. Due to parity in the nature of grievance and facts pleaded, O.A No. 350/922/2021 and O.A No. 350/654/2023 are heard together, upon due notice, to be disposed of by this common order, with consent of all the sides.

3. The applicant filed O.A No. 350/922/2021 under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 praying for the following relief(s):

“(a) An order or direction upon the respondents concerned to release/disburse the service benefit of his deceased husband i. e. specifically Family pension, PF, Gratuity and suspension Arrear and also others money which would have been entitle to him as a NOK forthwith, after quash/set aside the impugned Notice, orders, Charge sheet, enquiry proceeding.

(b) Any other or further order or orders, as Your Lordships may deem fit and proper;”

4. Subsequently, as per the liberty granted by this Court, she filed O.A No. 350/654/2023 claiming the following relief(s):

“i) To direct the respondent and each one of them to show cause as to why the compensation allowance should not be allowed to the applicant in view of death of husband upon reconsideration Appellate Authority's order.

ii) To direct the respondent and each one of them to allow to the applicant being the widow of the deceased employee the compensation allowance and/or admissible pension/family pension in accordance with law.

iii) To direct the respondents to produce the entire records of the case to this Tribunal for adjudication of the points in issue;

iv) And to pass such further or other orders and/or direction or directions as to this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper;”

5. Facts of the cases as narrated by the applicant are as follows:

Applicant is the widow of one Indrajit Chakraborty who worked as a Sr. T.C in Lumding Division of N.F. Railway from 1987 to 1998. He absented himself from duty without intimation to the authorities after 1998. He was issued with a major penalty charge sheet for unauthorized absence on 19.10.2006 and was punished with removal from service by Disciplinary Authority’s order dated 01.06.2009. On appeal, the punishment imposed by the Disciplinary Authority was upheld by the Appellate Authority and the Revisionary Authority vide orders dated 01.09.2009 and 16.06.2010 respectively. Indrajit Chakraborty died on 31/05/2018. The applicant, who married Indrajit Chakraborty on 28.04.2007 as per Hindu customs in Tarapith Temple, claimed the benefits due to her deceased husband including pension, P.F etc. vide her representation to the N.F. Railway authorities dated 14.07.2018 and on receiving no positive response from the authorities filed O.A No. 922/2021. During the pendency of the O.A, the applicant was paid the P.F (Rs. 2,12,635/-) and GIS (Rs. 13,227/-) due to her late husband. Respondent authorities passed an order dated 01.12.2022 explaining the reasons for not paying other dues claimed by her. The applicant has challenged the speaking order dated 01.12.2022 in O.A No. 654/2023 as per liberty granted to her by this Tribunal vide its order dated 01.11.2021.

Though the entire Disciplinary Proceedings culminating in the order of punishment has been challenged in O.A No. 922/2021, the Ld. Counsel for the applicant, during final hearing of O.A No. 922/2021 and O.A No. 654/2023, limited his challenge to denial of compassionate allowance to the husband of the