CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCH th Dated this the 06 day of March, 2026 Reserved On:26.02.2026 Pronounced On: 06.03.2026 CORAM:

Hon’ble Dr. Hukum Singh Meena, Member (A)

1. Vasuben Mavi W/o Amarsingh Jimal Mavi Fentale, Aged about 62-Years

2. Hirabhai Mavi S/o Amarsingh Jimal Mavi Male, Aged about 32 years Both Residing at:

Nishal Faliya, Gujndikheda, Ta. Uchavaniya, Dist. Dahod-389154 … Applicant (By Advocate: P.H.Pathak)

Versus

1. Union of India Notice to be served through The General Manager, Western Railway, Churche Gate, Mumbai – 400 020

2. The Divisional Railway Manager (E)

Western Railway, Pratapnagar, Vadodara-390004 ……Respondents (By Advocate:H.D.Shukla)

O R D E R Per : Hon’ble Dr.Hukum Singh Meena, Member (A)

1. Being aggrieved by the order No.E/conf./890/1 (HAM/20) dated 18.02.2020 whereby compassionate appointment of the applicant was rejected on the ground that his family members are also working as Track Maintainer and getting salary and pension, the applicant has filed this OA under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1965 seeking following relief:-

“(A) The Hon'ble Tribunal be pleased to declare the impugned decision of respondent no. 2 dated 18.2.2020, No. E/conf./890/1 (HAM/20) at ANNEXURE-A/1 and inaction on the part of respondent no. 2 to decide the appeal preferred by the widow for grant of compassionate appointment to applicant no. 2 as arbitrary, illegal, unjust and be pleased to set aside the impugned decision dated 18.2.2020 No. E/conf./890/1 (HAM/20) at ANNEXURE-A/1 and direct the respondents to grant compassionate appointment to applicant no. 2.

(B) The Hon’ble Tribunal be pleased to declare that the reasons given by respondent no. 2 are ex-facie bad in law to deny compassionate appointment to applicant no.2 and direct the respondents to grant compassionate appointment to the applicant.

(C). Any other and further relief as the Hon'ble Tribunal deems fit and proper be granted in the interest of justice together with cost.”

2. Brief facts of the case of the applicant are as follows:-

2.1 That the applicant No.1 is the widow and applicant No.2 is the son of late Shri Amarsingh Jimal Mavi who was working as a Track Maintainer Gr-III under SSE/P-Way/URN, with the Respondent No.2. The father of the applicant No.2 died on 20.06.2020 while on duty. Consequently, the mother of the applicant supplied death certificate to respondent No.2 and made an application dated 21.02.2020 requesting him to grant compassionate appointment to applicant No.2 being the eldest son. Thereafter, the application of the applicant No.1 was rejected vide order dated 18.02.2021 on the ground that the husband of applicant died just before three months and 10 days of his superannuation; the applicant No.1 is also working as a Track Maintainer and getting salary; and children are major and getting married. An amount of Rs.15,31,859/- was paid as settlement dues to the wife of the deceased. Applicant No.1 is also receiving family pension of Rs.17000 + DA.

2.2 Being aggrieved by the decision of the respondent, the applicant No.1 submitted representation dated 20.08.2021 to the Respondent No.2 requesting him to reconsider the case of the applicant No.2 for compassionate appointment. The applicant also referred the cases of compassionate appointment of other employees wherein the department gave compassionate appointment inspite of huge amount of settlement dues given to the legal heirs of the deceased employee (Annexure-A/2). Thereafter, when the applicant did not receive any response from the respondent, he was constrained to approach an advocate and advocate notice dated 16.09.2022 was issued to the respondents asking them to decide the appeal and grant appointment to applicant No.2 (Annexure-A/4).

2.3 The applicant No.1 was also retired from service and she is having five sons and all are dependent on their father.

Therefore, there is merit in the OA and same may be allowed.

3. The counsel for the applicant further contended o