Reserved CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, JABALPUR BENCH JABALPUR Original Application No.200/105/2023 th Bilaspur, this Tuesday, the 06 day of January, 2026 HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AKHIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON’BLE MRS. MALLIKA ARYA, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER

1. Santosh Kumar Yadav, S/o Late Sardari lal Yadav, aged about 63 years, Ward Kali Chowk, Seoni (M.P.) – 480661, Mo.7879495766.

2. Sandeep Yadav, S/o Sontosh Kumar Yadav, aged about 27 years, R/o Tagore Ward Kali Chowk, Seoni (M.P.) – 480661, Mo.7879495766.

3. Smt. Suneeta Yadav, S/o Shri Santosh Yadav, aged about 58 years, R/o Tagore Ward Kali Chowk, Seoni (M.P.) – 480661, Mo.7879495766.

-Applicants (By Advocate – Shri Adeetya Banerjee)

V e r s u s

1. Union of India through the General Manager, West Central Railway, Near Indira Market, Jabalpur – 482001.

2. Divisional Railway Manager, West Central Railway, Near M.P. High Court, Jabalpur – 482001.

3. Sr. Divisional Personnel Officer, O/o Divisional Railway Manager, West Central Railway, Near M.P. High Court, Jabalpur – 482001.

4. Assistant Divisional Engineer, West Central Railway, Narsinghpur (M.P.) – 487001.

5. Smt. Vasundhara Yadav, W/o Late Sudhir Kumar Yadav, aged about 32 years, R/o Near State Bank Colony, Chindwara – 480001.

- Respondents (By Advocate – Shri Satyendra Kumar Patel)

(Date of reserving order : 11.12.2025)

O R D E R By Akhil Kumar Srivastava, Member (J).

The applicant No.1 is the father of deceased employee Sudhir Kumar Yadav while the applicant No.2 is brother of late Sudhir Kumar Yadav and the applicant No.3 is the mother. They are seeking direction to pay the compensation for accidental death of Sudhir Kumar Yadav in equal share to them along with respondent No.5, who is the wife of the deceased.

2. The applicants have stated in their Original Application that late Shri Sudhir Kumar Yadav was an employee of the respondent department, who died in a train accident while performing his duty as Trackman. The death was unnatural and caused due to train accident, which is evident from the post-mortem report filed as Annexure A-1 & A-2 respectively. The respondent No.5 is the wife of deceased employee. According to the applicants, the deceased and his wife was not having healthy relationship and even after eight years of marriage, no child was born from their wedlock. The applicant No.3 is the Class – 1 legal heir of the deceased under Hindu Succession Act, 1956 and is entitled to receive equal share in the estate of the deceased including retiral dues, compensation along with wife of the deceased. The registration of unnatural death under Section 174 of CRPC was done on 23.11.2022 at Thana Ganj, Kareli, District – Narsinghpur. The applicants pray to grant them equal share in the estate of the deceased along with wife of the deceased.

3. The official respondents have filed their reply inter alia stating that in the nomination from submitted by deceased employee, he has nominated respondent No.5 as 100% nominee. As per Para 10(A)(i) of Rule-75 of Railway Service Pension Rules, 1993, family pension to the parents shall be payable if the parents were wholly dependent on the Government servant immediately before his or her death and the deceased Government is not survived by a widow or an eligible child. Therefore, the family pension can only be granted to the legally wedded wife of the deceased as per the rules.

4. In their rejoinder, the applicants have placed reliance on a decision of Hon’ble High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh at Jammu in OWP No.986/2010 decided on 20.09.2021 (Vaishnu Devi vs. Union of India &

others), wherein it has been held as under:

“23) The stand of the official respondents, that even this amount is to be construed as terminal substance. As noticed above, the nomination in terms of Rule 53 is only with respect to death-cum-gratuity and for no other terminal benefits. Otherwise also, the official respondents have not been able to show me any statutory rule or even executive instructions to s