IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) 24.02.2010 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO : 1381 of 2006 Between: Smt. Zulekha Begum, aged 36 years, W/o late Ghouse Moinuddin ..... PETITIONER AND The General Manager, Sought Central Railway, Secunderabad and one another .....RESPONDENT(S) ORDER: (Per Sri Justice GHULAM MOHAMMED) This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad in O.A.No. 516 of 2005 dated 20.10.2005 and to quash the same as illegal along with the impugned order dated 8.1.2002 and further direct the respondents to sanction compassionate allowance to the petitioner widow under Rule 65 of the Railway Service (Pension) Rules 1993 read with serial No. 145/1995 dated 1.12.1995 of CPO/SC. O.A.No. 516 of 2005 was filed under section 19 of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985 for sanction of compassionate allowance under Rule 65 of Railway Service (Pension) Rules. Brief facts of the case are that the applicant-petitioner is a widow of one Sri Late Gouse Moinuddin who was working as Jeep Driver in the Railways. It is stated that initially he was joined 3.7.1984 as regular Khalasi and was removed from service for unauthorised absence and finally died on 24.12.1992. Hence, the wife, applicant-petitioner made a representation on 29.11.2000 to the respondents, for settlement of dues of her late husband and the same was rejected by them vide order dated 8.1.2002. Thereafter, she also made several representations to the respondents but so far no action has been taken in the matter. Hence, she approached the Tribunal by filing O.A. The Tribunal dismissed the application after taking into consideration of Rule 65 of Railway Services (Pension) Rules, 1993, which reads as under: “65. Compassionate Allowance (1) A railway servant who is dismissed or removed from service shall forfeit his pension and gratuity: Provided that the authority competent to dismiss or remove him from service may, if the case is deserving of special consideration, sanction a compassionate allowance not exceeding two-thirds of pension or gratuity or both which would have been admissible to him if he had retired on compensation pension. (2) A compassionate allowance sanctioned under the proviso to sub-rule (1) shall not be less than three hundred seventy five rupees per mensem.” The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that the Tribunal ought to have taken note of the proviso, which confers power and ought to have exercised power vested in it reasonably so as to meet the ends of justice. Heard the learned counsel and also perused the material made available on record. As seen from the impugned order, the Tribunal has committed an error in dismissing the O.A. Here is a case where widow approached the authorities after the demise of her husband for seeking compassionate allowance and also gratuity. A plain reading of the proviso to Rule 65 of Railway Services (Pension) Rules, 1993, clearly says that “if the case is deserving of special consideration, sanction a compassionate allowance not exceeding two thirds of pension or gratuity or both which would have been admissible to him if he had retired on compensation pension”. Here the Tribunal has not exercised the jurisdiction in a proper perspective. Therefore, this aspect needed attention of the Tribunal apart from the application of two thirds of pension or gratuity or both which would have been admissible to him if he had retired on ‘compulsory retirement’. Hence, the impugned order passed by the Tribunal is liable to be quashed. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed and the impugned order passed by the Tribunal stands quashed. Respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner under the proviso to Rule 65 of Railway Services (Pension) Rules, 1993 and pass appropriate orders sympathetically within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J _________________________ SANJAY KUMAR, J Dt. 24.2. 2010 KA ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 2 CD copies