IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S. ASHOK KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO : 8492 of 2008 Between: Kum. K.Anjali D/o.Late K.Ramakrishna C/o.D.V.V Satyanarayana Surngavruksham Near Railway Gate,534 243 Palakoderu(M) W.G Dist ..... PETITIONER AND The Senior Divisional Accounts Manager Vijayawada Division,S.C.R Vijayawada-1 .....RESPONDENT Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue a writ,order or direction more particularly one in the nature of a writ of Certiorari and call for the records relating to and connected with O.A No.328 of 2006 dt.22-11-2006 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal Hyd Bench at Hyd and quash holding the same as being arbitray illegal and unconstitutional Further that uncles and until the statutory rules are amended by the competent authority they cannot be glossed over in the name of the office memorandum etc and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.K.S.MURTHY Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.R.S.MURTHY (ADD.CGSC) The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S. ASHOK KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO : 8492 of 2008 ORAL ORDER: Assailing the orders passed in O A No. 328 of 2006 dated 22.11.2006, by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad bench, dismissing the Original Application, the present writ petition is filed. The father of the petitioner, who was employed in the South Central Railway, as Gangman, unfortunately died on 28.8.1988 and later on, her mother who was employed as “Safaiwala”, died on 18.11.1994. The respondents paid family pension to the petitioner till November, 2005. Thereafter, by proceedings dated 5.10.2005 she was provided employment on compassionate grounds and the family pension was stopped. The petitioner claims that as per the Railway Services (Pension) Rules, 1993, an unmarried daughter will get family pension only upto the age of 25 years or until she gets married, whichever is earlier, as such she is eligible to family pension. Since her contention was not accepted, she approached the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad bench (for short the Tribunal) by filing O.A. No. 328 of 2006. The Tribunal elaborately considered the issue raised by the petitioner herein and rejected the plea of the petitioner on the ground that in terms of modification to OM No. 1(26) P & PW/90(E) dated 18.1.1993, the family pension in respect of sons/daughters (including widowed and divorced daughters) will become inadmissible, when the otherwise eligible son/daughter starts earning Rs.2550/- per month from the employment from Government or private sector, self employment etc. Since the petitioner herein is provided with employment on compassionate basis and joined the service on 5.10.2005, she became ineligible to receive family pension in terms of the modification to OM No. 1(26) P & PW/90(E) dated 18.1.1993, and the action of the respondents in stopping the family pension of the petitioner cannot be found fault with. In the circumstances of the case, we are of the considered opinion that the order of the Tribunal in O A No. 328 of 2006 dated 22.11.2006 needs no interference by this Court. There are no merits in the writ petition and the same is hereby dismissed. No costs. ____________________ T.MEENA KUMARI, J. ________________ S. ASHOK KUMAR,J Date: 22.4.2008 mvb THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S. ASHOK KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO : 8492 of 2008 Date: 22.4.2008