PRABHAVATI DEVI versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

Citation: [1995] SUPP. 5 S.C.R. 421 · Decided: 16-11-1995 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: M.M. PUNCHHI, SUJATA V. MANOHAR · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

.. 
PRABHAVATI DEVI 
v. 
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. 
NOVEMBER 16, 1995 
[M.M. PUNCHHI AND SUJATA V. MANOHAR, JJ.) 
Se1Vice Law: 
Indian Railway Establishment Manual/Manual of Railway Pension 
Rules: 
Paragraphs 2311(3)(b), 2315, 2318/R.801-Family Pension-Grant of 
A 
B 
c 
to f amity of 'substitute'-Husband of claimant died after having worked as 
'substitute' for more than three years-Claim for gratuity and family pen-
sion-Railways granting gratuity but denying family pension-Held, deceased 
having worked as substitute continuously beyond six months had acquired D 
temporary status before his demise:-His wife and children were entitled to 
family pension. 
The husband of the appellant worked with the Railways initially as 
a casual worker and later as a 'substitute' with effect from 27.4.1983 till 
5.1.1987 when he died. The Railways though paid the appellant the gratuity, E 
denied to her the family pension. Being unsuccessful before the Central 
Administrative Tribunal, she filed the present appeal. 
Allowing the appeal, this Court 
HELD : 1.1. The Tribunal was not right in dismissing the claim of F 
family pension to the wife and children of the deceased. It overlooked the 
chain in consequence-making the worker acquire a temporary status and 
on his demise, his wife and children acquiring the right to claim family 
pension. [423-D-E] 
1.2. Appellant's husband worked as a substitute continuously beyond G 
six months and as such had acquired, before his demise, rights and 
privileges admissible to a temporary Railway servant, as envisaged by para 
2318 of Indian Railway Establishment Manual. Having become a temporary 
servant in this manner, on his demise, his wife and children became eligible 
to family pension under the provisions of para 2311 (3) (b) of Establishment H 
421 
422 
SUPREME COURT REJ>ORTS [1995} SUPP. 5 S.C.R. 
A 
Manual and Rule 801 of the Manual of Railway Pension Rules. The Rail.-
ways shall work out the pension accordingly. (422-G-H; 423-A-B; E-F] 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
L. Robe1t D'Souza v. Ex. Engi,neer, Southern Railway and Anr., (1982) 
1SCC645 and U.0.1. and Ors. v.Basant Lal and Ors., JT (1992) 2 SC 459, 
relied on. 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 10492 of 
1995. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 15.1.91 of the Central Ad-
ministrative Tribunal, Patna in Registration No. O.A. No. 22J)/89. 
Vidya Bhushan Misra for H.A. Raichura (NP) for the Appellant. 
R.R. Misra, AK. Sharma and V.K. Verma for the Respondents. 
The following Order of the Court was delivered : 
Leave granted. 
Heard learned counsel for the parties. 
The appellant herein is the widow of late Bipin Kumar Rai who was 
a temporary Railway servant in this manner : He, initially, was taken in the 
Railway Establishment as a casual worker; and w.e.f. 27.4.83 he acquired 
the status of a 'substitute'. According to the definition given in Rule 2315 
of the terms and conditions applicable to 'substitutes' in temporary service, 
they are persons engaged in the Indian Railway Establishments on regular 
scales of pay and allowances applicable to posts against which they are 
employed. These posts may fall vacant on account of a ,railway servant 
being on leave or due to non-availability of permanent or temporary railway 
servants and which cannot be kept vacant. 
The deceased kept working as a 'substitute' till 5.1.87 when he died. 
G But, before his demise, he came to acquire certain rights and privileges 
under Rule 2318 of the Rules applicable to Railway Establishments. The 
said rule provides that substitutes shall be afforded all the rights and 
privileges as may be admissible to temporary railway servants, from time 
to time, on completion of 6 months' continuous service. Indubitably, the 
H deceased had worked beyond 6 months and that too continuously. Having 
P. DEVIv. U.O.I 
423 
become a temporary servant in this manner, he became entitled to family A 
pension under sub-rule 3(b) of Rule 2311; whereunder it is provided that 
the widow/minor children of a temporary Railway servant, who dies while 
in service after a service of not less than 1 year continuous (qualifying) 
service shall be eligible for a family pension under the provisions of para 
801 of the Manual of Railway Pension Rules. Further, in their case the B 
amount of death gratuity admissible will be reduced by an amount equal 
to the employee's 2 months' pay on which the death gratuity is determined. 
The Railways have paid to the appellant gratuity under

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.