##PAGE1##

1

O.A.No. 260/00424 of 2022

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

O.A.No. 260/00424 of 2022

CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK

CORAM:

Reserved on 26.02.2026 Pronounced on 27.02 .2026

THE HON’BLE SHRI SUDHI RANJAN MISHRA, MEMBER (J)

THE HON’BLE SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR DAS, MEMBER (A)

Smt. Binata Naik, aged about 46 years,

Divorced D/o- Late Sashi Naik, At/P.O.

Baralpokhari, Via: Charampa, Dist: Bhadrak,

Odisha-756101; VERSUS

……Applicant

1. Union of India represented through its

Secretary, Ministry of Personnel, Public

Grievances & Pensions Department of Pension

and Pensioners Welfare, Lok Nayak Bhavan

(3rd Floor) Khan Market, New Delhi - 110 003;

2. The Divisional Railway Manager (P), East Coast

Railway, Khurda Road, Khurda.

……Respondents

For the applicant : Mr. K.K.Dash, Counsel

For the respondentOs R : MDr . BE. S aRm antaray, Counsel

PRAMOD KUMAR DAS, MEMBER (A):

The applicant, who is the divorced daughter of deceased

railway employee, has filed this OA challenging the order dated

20.08.2021 wherein her prayer for family pension has been

RAVI KUMAR

2026.03.02

16:18:43 +05'30'

2

O.A.No. 260/00424 of 2022

rejected and has sought relief of release of family pension as she

is entitled to after the death of her mother.

2. Brief facts of the case, as inter alia averred in the OA, are

that mother of the applicant, while working as Sweeper/Jamadar

in the Chief Health Inspector, E.Co.Rly., Jajpur Keonjhar Road

expired on 31.05.2018 leaving behind three sons and a daughter

as legal heirs. It is submitted that applicant was all along

residing with her mother since 2015 as she has no independent

source of income. Although, the applicant was married on

10.05.1985 but she got separated from her husband by a consent

decree obtained from the Learned Court of the Judge, Family

Court, Cuttack on 25.04.2019, after which, she made a series of

representations to the authority to release the family pension in

her favour. It is submitted that the respondents vide letter dated

20.08.2021 rejected her claim on the ground that since the

divorce was done after the death of her mother, she is not

entitled to the family pension. Being aggrieved, she has filed this

OA praying to quash the order dated 20.08.2021 and to direct the

respondents to release the pensionary and other financial

RAVI KUMAR

2026.03.02

16:18:43 +05'30'

3

O.A.No. 260/00424 of 2022

benefits to her from the date of her entitlement along with

arrears. Hence the OA.

3. The respondents have filed their counter inter alia

averring that applicant and her husband, Madhu Naik, had filed

Civil Proceeding No. 372 of 2018 before Hon’ble Judge, Family

Court, Cuttack, to dissolve their marriage on mutual consent on

20.07.2018 after the death of the railway employee on

31.05.2018 and the same was allowed on 25.04.2019. It is

submitted that as per para 6 of RBE No. 102/2017 it has been

decided “to grant family pension to a divorced daughter in such

cases where the divorce proceeding had been filed in a

competent court during the life time of the employee/pensioner

or his/her spouse” but in this case the divorce took place after

their death. Accordingly, it is submitted that the applicant is not

entitled to family pension since the proceeding was filed on

20.07.2018 after the death of the employee. Hence, the

respondents have prayed for dismissal of the OA.

RAVI KUMAR

2026.03.02

16:18:43 +05'30'

4

O.A.No. 260/00424 of 2022

4. The applicant has filed rejoinder reiterating the stand

taken by her in the OA.

5. Heard both sides and perused the records.

6. We find that in a similar case, Hon’ble HUigOhI &C oOurrst Vosf

BSmomt.b Uasyh (aN aEgkpnuart hB ePnacthil at Nagpur) in the case of

, WP No. 6884/2016, AIRONLINE 2018

BOM 736, has held:

19. Here, fact of customary divorce is not in

dispute. The Competent Civil Court has on

“29/11/2010 in recognition of customary divorce and

separate stay from 21/7/1992 dissolved

marriage. Thus, fact that daughter – Usha was not

residing with her husband since 21/7/1992 has been

accepted by competent Court. The Central

Administrative Tribunal