Sushila Gupta vs Union Of India And Ors

This Original Application (OA) has been filed by the applicant claiming the following reliefs:-

"(a) To quash and set aside office order no.729E/26/3471/P-2 dated 21.04.2017 passed by Divisional Personnel Officer/Admin Northern Railway New Delhi marked as Annexure No.A-1 with this petition.

(b) To pass such orders and direction to revise the Family Pension and arrears of pension according to the Judgment passed by the Hon'ble High Court on 07.02.2008 passed in WP(C) 566/2000 in All India Shramik Coach Attendants Association Versus Union of India and Ors. and Contempt Petition No.311/2009 order dated 04.12.2012.

(c) Pass any other order/orders which deem fit and proper in the interest of justice."

The brief facts of the case that this is the second round of litigation. Earlier the applicant had filed the OA No. 203/2017 before this Tribunal, and the said OA was disposed of on 18.01.2016 in which the respondents were directed to consider her representation dated 11.08.2016. In compliance with the aforesaid order of the Tribunal, the respondents, vide their order dated 21.04.2017, had disposed of her representation on the grounds that no records is available in the office as the case pertains to 1989 and the representation seeking settlement of dues/pension/family pension benefits was made after a lapse of nearly 28 years which is badly time barred as per PS 1666.

The applicant has challenged the aforesaid impugned order of the respondents dated 21.04.2017 on the grounds that judgment passed by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in WP(C) No.566/2000 allowing the pay scale of Rs. 110-180 to all the coach attendants from the year 1960 is judgment in rem, but the applicant being the similarly situated person has not been given the benefit of revision of pension and the benefits of arrears in view of the aforesaid judgment of the Hon'ble High Court. The applicant has further alleged that law of limitation cannot be applied in her case as she is getting family pension and the benefits of revision of pension and arrears thereof in light of the aforesaid judgment were given to all the similarly situated Coach Attendants who are alive or to the widows and wards of the deceased Coast Attendant after 2013. Being aggrieved with the aforesaid impugned order of the respondents, the applicant has filed the present OA.

In reply to the above, the respondents have filed their counter affidavit in which they have submitted that pursuant to the directions of the Tribunal in OA No. 203/2017, they have considered the case of the applicant and found that no record is available in the office as the case pertains to year 1989 and after a lapse of nearly 28 years, the applicant had submitted representation regarding settlement dues/pension/family pension benefits. They have thus contended that in the absence of service/other records, the applicant's case could not be processed further, as request is badly time barred as per PS 1666. They have thus prayed for dismissal of the OA.

The applicant, in response to the reply of the respondents, has filed her rejoinder affidavit in which she seeks to draw parity with one Sarafat Ali and submitted that in the case of said person also, the records were not available with the Indian Railways and he was released benefits of arrears in year 2013 on the basis of affidavit submitted by him. The applicant has thus submitted that she is also on the same footing so arrears of pension and consequential benefits should be paid to her. She has thus submitted that her case deserves to be allowed.

After hearing both the parties and perusing the record, it is noticed that the respondents, in compliance with the order of this Tribunal passed in OA No. 203/2017, though have considered the case of the applicant in terms of the decision of the Hon'ble High Court in the WP(C) No.566/2000, but could not process her case for want of records as they were pertained to the year 1989. In the rejoinder affidavit, it has been pointed out that when the service records of similarly placed person, i.e., Shri Sarafat Ali (President) All India Shramik & Coach Attendant Association was not available at the time of payment of arrears in year 2013, the respondents took affidavit from him and subsequently, paid arrears to him in the year 2013 itself. Simply because the husband of the applicant has passed away cannot be a ground to deny her the benefits which were due to him.

In view of the above factual position, the respondents are directed to adopt the same procedure in this matter as have been adopted in the case of a similarly situated person, namely, Sh Sarafat Ali, by taking affidavit from the applicant who is the widow of late Yashpal Gupta and to pay arrears of pension and consequential benefits as per the order dated 04.01.2012 of the Hon'ble High Court passed in WP(C) No.566/2000, the operative part of which reads as under:-

"The Wit Petition is hereby allowed. The respondents are directed to grant the claim of the petitioners for their placement in the pay scale of Rs.110-180/-since the year 1960, when the petitioners were recategorized as Passenger Attendants Grade-I with the Indian Railways and the scales revised from time to time by various Pay Commissions of the persons who were placed in the similarly pay scale of Rs.110-180/- in the Railway at the relevant time and have been granted revised scales as per the recommendations of the various Pay Commissions from time to time, with all consequential benefits not later than 15th March, 2008. The Writ Petition accordingly stands disposed of."

The above exercise shall be carried out by the respondents within a period of 90 days of receipt of a copy of this order. In case the Railway authorities are able to discover the records of the deceased husband of the applicant, they shall process the claim of the applicant based on those records and otherwise they shall proceed to give the pension to this applicant, as done in the case of similarly placed person Sarafat Ali - referred to in Para 7 above. The arrears of revised pension and consequential benefits as due be also given to the applicant within a period of 90 days of receipt of a copy of this order.

With the above directions, the OA stands disposed of. No order as to costs.