IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS TUESDAY, THE 10TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 21ST MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 19160 of 2005(S) -------------------------- OA.111/2004 of CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,ERNAKULAM BENCH .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- K.GEETHA, AGED 38 YEARS, W/O.LATE KANNAN, RESIDING AT KAPILAR STREET, CHUNNAMPUCHOOLAI, OLD SURAMANGALAM, SALEM-5. BY ADV. SRI.T.C.GOVINDA SWAMY SMT.D.HEERA SRI.P.NPANKAJAKSHAN PILLAI RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE GENERAL MANAGER, SOUTHERN RAILWAY, HEADQUARTERS OFFICE, PARK TOWN P.O., CHENNAI-3. 2. THE ADDITIONAL DIVISIONAL RAILWAY MANAGER, SOUTHER RAILWAY, PALGHAT DIVISION, PALGHAT. 3. THE DIVISIONAL PERSONNEL OFFICER, SOUTHERN RAILWAY, PALGHAT DIVISION, PALGHAT. 4. THE SENIOR DIVISIONAL FINANCE MANAGER, SOUTHERN RAILWAY, PALGHAT DIVISION, PALGHAT. ADV. SRI.T.P.M.IBRAHIM KHAN,SR.SC, RAILWAYS THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC 19160/2005 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXTS, EXT.P1 - A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 4.1.05 IN OA NO.111 OF 2004 PASSED BY HON'BLE CAT, ERNAKULAM BENCH. EXT.P2 - A TRUE COPY OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.111 OF 2004 ALONG WITH ITS ANNEXURES. EXT.P3 - A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY STATEMENT FILED ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENTS IN OA NO.111/04 ALONG WITH ITS ANNEXURES. EXT.P4 - A TRUE COPY OF THE REJOINDER FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN OA NO.111/04. /TRUE COPY/ K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. ----------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO. 19160 OF 2005-S ----------------------------------------- Dated 10th February, 2009. JUDGMENT Balakrishnan Nair, J. The applicant in O.A.No.111/2004 before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ernakulam Bench is the writ petitioner. The respondents herein were the respondents in that O.A. 2. The brief facts of the case are the following: The petitioner's husband Mr.Kannan was a Pointsman, who worked in Palakkad Division of the Southern Railway. He was missing since 20.12.1994. An F.I.R was lodged on 31.10.1998, regarding the missing of the said person. As per the relevant regulations of the Railways, after the lapse of one year from the date of lodging of the FIR, it can be presumed that the missing person is dead and the date of death will be taken as the date of lodging of the FIR. Therefore, the petitioner's husband was treated as dead with effect from 31.10.1998. As per the direction of the C.A.T., the petitioner's claim for the terminal benefits due to the deceased, as also for family pension, was WPC 19160/2005 2 considered by the competent authority of the Railways and the same was sanctioned to her. While releasing those benefits, penal rent was levied and deducted, for the period the petitioner continued to stay in the quarters from the date of missing of her husband. Further, the terminal benefits were computed, taking into account the pre-revised pay of the deceased person. In fact, with effect from 1.1.1996, revised pay scales came into force, as a result of the implementation of the recommendations of the Fifth Central Pay Commission. Challenging, the recovery of penal rent and also praying to compute the service benefits and family pension, taking into account the pay revision, the petitioner approached the C.A.T, by filing the aforementioned O.A. Both the reliefs sought by the petitioner were granted by the Tribunal, by Ext.P1 order. But, it was ordered that she is eligible to get the arrears of family pension only with effect from 12.2.2004, the date on which the O.A was filed. 3. The respondents herein, aggrieved by the said order of the C.A.T., filed W.P.(C) No.18374/2005. The said Writ Petition was dismissed by a Division Bench of this Court on 3.3.2008. The present Writ Petition is filed by the petitioner, challenging the direction of the C.A.T that she is eligible to get the arrears of family pension only with effect from 12.2.2004. 4. The respondents have filed a counter affidavit in this writ petition. WPC 19160/2005 3 In the said affidavit, they are disputing the correctness of the order of the C.A.T., concerning the main points decided against them. Such a stand was taken, apparently, because of the pendency of the writ petition filed by them against Ext.P1. 5. We heard the learned counsel on both sides. It is not in dispute that Kannan, the husband of the petitioner is treated as having retired/died on 31.10.1998. The Tribunal also found that the terminal benefits due to the deceased are liable to be computed in the light of the revised scale of pay. If that be so, the petitioner is entitled to get the arrears of family pension from 31.10.1998. There is no reason or justification for fixing the date as 12.2.2004. We find that no reasons are forthcoming in the order for taking such a view. Going by the facts of the case, we have no doubt that the petitioner is entitled to get the arrears of family pension from the date she became eligible for family pension. The respondents have also sanctioned the pensionary benefits with effect from 31.10.1998, The only dispute was concerning the pay scale applicable. That has been resolved by the C.A.T in favour of the petitioner and the same has been upheld by this Court also. Therefore, there is no reason to deprive the widow of the arrears of family pension from 31.10.1998. Accordingly, it is ordered that the petitioner shall be paid the arrears of revised family pension from 31.10.1998. The amount WPC 19160/2005 4 due to her, based on the above direction, shall be released to her by respondents 3 and 4 within three months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment. The Writ Petition is allowed as above. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE. M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS, JUDGE. nm/