LexMALA DEVI versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2025] 8 S.C.R. 221 : 2025 INSC 855 Mala Devi v. Union of India & Ors. (Civil Appeal No. 10672 of 2016) 16 July 2025 [Sanjay Karol and Satish Chandra Sharma,* JJ.] Issue for Consideration Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Appellant is entitled to family pension of her late husband, and whether a denial of such relief was justified. Headnotes† Indian Railway Establishment Manual & the Railway Pension Rules, 1993 – rr.75, 18(3) – Family pension – Entitlement to – Appellant’s husband, a temporary employee with the Eastern Indian Railways died in harness – Claim of the Appellant for family pension was denied on the ground that it is not admissible to the wife of an employee whose services were not regularized – Justifiability: Held: Unjustifiable – r.75 makes it clear that the qualifying service for a temporary railway servant to be entitled for the grant of benefit of family pension is a continuous service of one year – More so, this benefit of family pension is accrued to the family of the deceased railway servant who died in harness after completion of one year of continuous service, without any discrimination, whether the post was temporary or had been regularized – Appellant’s husband, after one year of continuous service, clearing his medical examination, screening and upon being subsequently deputed on a different post, acquired the status of a temporary railway servant for the purposes of the 1993 Pension Rules and thus, became entitled to the benefit of family pension, as any other temporary railway servant – Depriving the Appellant of family pension from her deceased husband for not completing 10 years of qualifying service by falling short of hardly 3 months, is not in congruence with the legislative intent of the 1993 Pension Rules – Appellant entitled to family pension in light of the decision in Prabhavati Devi case – Family pension * Author 222 [2025] 8 S.C.R. Supreme Court Reports qua the deceased governed as per r.75 r/w r.18(3) – Impugned order of High Court and the order of the CAT, Patna, set aside – Ex-gratia amount of Rs.5,00,000/- awarded to the Appellant in exercise of power u/Art.142. [Paras 9-11, 13-15] Case Law Cited Prabhavati Devi v. Union of India & Ors. [1995] Supp. 5 SCR 421 : AIR 1996 SC 752 – relied on. Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. & Ors. v. Surji Devi [2008] 1 SCR 1042 : (2008) 2 SCC 310 – referred to. List of Acts Indian Railway Establishment Manual & the Railway Pension Rules, 1993; Constitution of India. List of Keywords Family pension; Benefit of family pension; Entitled to Benefit of family pension; Eastern Indian Railways; Temporary employee with the Eastern Indian Railways; Temporary employee died in harness; Temporary railway servant; Regularization; Railway servant died in harness; Summer Waterman; Guard/Shuntman; One year of continuous service; 10 years in service not completed; Minimum qualifying service; Ex-gratia amount awarded; Article 142 of the Constitution of India. Case Arising From CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 10672 of 2016 From the Judgment and Order dated 12.05.2016 of the High Court of Judicature at Patna in CWJC No. 8524 of 2016 Appearances for Parties Advs. for the Appellant: Brijesh Kumar, Ritik Malik, Ms. Geetanjali Setia, Mainsha Suri, Akhil Suri, Nishi Kant Singh, Rajiv Ranjan Dwivedi. Advs. for the Respondents: S.D. Sanjay, A.S.G., Sachin Sharma, Amit Sharma, Anmol Chandan, Vinayak Sharma, Sachin Sharma, Harish Pandey, Alabhya Dhamija, Arvind Kumar Sharma. [2025] 8 S.C.R. 223 Mala Devi v. Union of India & Ors. Judgment / Order of the Supreme Court Judgment Satish Chandra Sharma, J. 1. The Appellant herein is the widow of Late Shri Om Prakash Maharaj, a temporary employee with the Eastern Indian Railways, who died in harness on 10.07.1996, having completed 9 years 8 months and 26 days of service from the date of his appointment on 15.10.1986. 2. The Appellant had approached the Learned Central Administrative Tribunal vide O.A./050/00276/2014 seeking family pension from the date of death of her husband with all consequential benefits along with interest at the rate of 18% per annum, which was dismissed by the Learned Tribunal vide Judgment/Order dated 23.12.2015. Vide the said decision, the Learned Tribunal held that the claim of the Appellant was devoid of any merit, inasmuch as in absence of a document for regularization and permanent absorption of t
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.