SATISH TUMANE Digitally signed by S TU AT M IS A H NE 2026:CGHC:1639-DB Date:

2026.01.14

14:31:49 +0530 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No.193 of 2026 Ms. Uma Sarkar D/o Late Upendra Nath Sarkar Aged About 56 Years Ex.SS/JTI, R/o Shanker Nagar, Near Hussain Kirana Store, Railway Crossing, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.

... Petitioner(s)

versus

1 - Union Of India Through The General Manager, 5th Floor, Gm Office, SEC Railways, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

2 - Chief Personnel Officer Office Of Department Of Personnel, Bilaspur Division, SEC Railway, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Divisional Personnel Officer Department Of Personnel, Office Of DRM, SEC Railway, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.

... Respondent(s)

For Petitioner(s) : Shri Lavkush Kumar Sahu appears along with Shri Syed Afaque Hussain Rizvi, Advocates For Respondent(s) : Shri Ramakant Mishra, DSGI appears along with Ms. Shweta Rai, Advocate DB: Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay S. Agrawal &

Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad

Order On Board

Per Sanjay S. Agrawal, J

12/01/2026

1) The petitioner, being a divorced daughter, has filed this petition questioning the legality and propriety of the order dated 27/10/2025 (Annexure P-12), passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur Bench (Circuit Sitting at Bilaspur) in Original Application No.343 of 2023, whereby, re-authorization of family pension has been refused to her, while affirming the order dated 03/03/2022 passed by the Respondent Department.

2) From perusal of the record, it appears that the father of the petitioner, namely, Upendra Nath Sarkar was retired from the Railway Services on 31/05/2000 and died subsequently on 30/09/2005 and, on account of his sad demise, his wife, namely, Smt. Usha Sarkar has availed the family benefits till her life time, i.e. up to 29/05/2019, when she died. It appears further that the petitioner, being a divorced daughter, moved an application (Annexure P-5) on 22/08/2019 before the Senior Divisional Personnel Officer, South Eastern Central Railway, Bilaspur, seeking grant/re-authorization of family pension. The said application was rejected by the Respondent Department on 03/03/2022 (Annexure P-8) holding that by virtue of the Railway Establishment No.152/2017, she is not entitled to get the said benefit, as she was found to be divorced after the death of her parents and, the said observation was affirmed further by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur Bench in an Original Application No.343 of 2023 filed by the petitioner and, being aggrieved, the instant petition has been filed.

3) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that since the proceeding for divorce was already initiated by the petitioner’s husband during the lifetime of her parents, therefore, the application as rejected by the Respondent Authorities, affirmed by the Central Administrative Tribunal vide its order impugned, cannot be held to be sustainable in the eye of law and deserves to be quashed.

4) On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that since the decree of divorce was granted after the death of the petitioner’s parents, therefore, in view of the Railway Establishment Rules No.152/2017, her claim has rightly been refused.

5) We have learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the entire papers carefully.

6) It is to be seen at this juncture, the Office Memorandum dated

19/07/2017 issued by the Ministry of Personnel, P.G. & Pensions, Department of Pension & Pensioners’ Welfare, which is applicable to the Respondent Department as well, is relevant for the purpose, which reads as under :-

Ministry of Personnel, P.G. & Pensions Department of Pension & Pensioners' Welfare

3rd floor, Lok Nayak Bhawan, Khan Market, New Delhi, 19^th July, 2017 OFFICE MEMORANDUM Sub:- Eligibility of divorced daughters for grant of family pension-clarification regarding.

Provision for grant of family pension to a widowed/divorced da