Lokesh Kumar vs Delhi Transport Corporation And Ors

In  this  OA  filed  under  Section  19  of  the  Administrative Tribunals  Act,  1985, applicant-Shri  Lokesh  Kumar has  prayed  for  a direction to the respondent-Delhi Transport Corporation (DTC) to pay him family pension with effect from the date following the date of death of his mother-Smt. Sheela Devi, widow of late Shri Tejveer Singh, ex-Conductor, DTC, till he attains the age of 25 years.

Brief facts of the case, which are relevant for the purpose of deciding the issue involved in the present O.A. and are not disputed by either side, are that Shri Tejveer Singh, while in service as a Conductor with the respondent-DTC, expired on 17.12.2009. His widow Smt. Sheela Devi (mother of the applicant) submitted the requisite papers and Form No.14 for payment of family pension to her. Accordingly, family pension was sanctioned and disbursed to Smt. Sheela Devi with effect from 18.12.2009 till the date of her death, i.e., 31.1.2016. The applicant, vide his letter dated 9.2.2016, informed the respondent-DTC about the death of his mother Smt. Sheela Devi, and requested the respondent-DTC to release and pay family pension to him till he attains the age of 25 years. The respondent-DTC, vide letter dated 18.5.2017(Annexure R-1), informed the applicant that his mother did not give any information about other family members in Form No.14 at the time of sanction of family pension to her, and, therefore, the family pension could not be granted to him.

In the above context, Mr.Sushant Mukund, learned counsel appearing for the applicant, drew the attention of the Tribunal to copies of Medical Card No.6698 issued by the respondent-DTC in March 2006 and of the certificate of Delhi Secondary School Examination, 2010, issued in favour of the applicant by the Central Board of Secondary Education, and submitted that those documents clearly go to show that the applicant was the son of late Shri Tejveer Singh and aged less than 25 years when his mother passed away. It was also submitted by Mr.Sushant Mukund that being an illiterate lady, the applicant's mother got all the requisite papers including Form No.14 for grant of family pension completed/filled by other persons and submitted the same to the respondent-DPC. When the Medical Card issued by the respondent-DTC clearly shows that the applicant was the son of late Shri Tejveer Singh and was aged less than 25 years at the time of death of his mother, the respondent-DTC ought not to have refused family pension to the applicant, only by taking into account the said Form No.14 submitted by the applicant's mother at the time of grant of family pension on death late Shri Tejveer Singh. It was further submitted by Mr.Sushant Mukund that the mere non-mentioning of the particulars of other family members of late Shri Tejveer Singh in Form No.14 would not disentitle the applicant and/or extinguish his right to get family pension, when the service records of late Shri Tejveer Singh available with the respondent-DTC go to show that there were other family members including the applicant, and that the applicant was aged less than 25 years at the time of death of his mother, the family pension beneficiary. In view of the above, it was submitted by Mr.Sushant Mukund, the respondent-DTC has acted arbitrarily and unreasonably in refusing to grant family pension to the applicant.

Per contra, Ms.Ruchira Gupta, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-DTC drew the attention of the Tribunal to Rules 54 and 81 of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972, as well as to copy of Form No.14 submitted by the applicant's mother in the year 2010, and submitted that in the absence of particulars of other family members in Form No.14 submitted by the applicant's mother, the respondent-DTC cannot be faulted for not declining the applicant's request for family pension with effect from the date following the date of death of his mother.

After having given my thoughtful consideration to the rival contentions, I have found no substance in the contention of the respondent-DTC. It is not the case of the respondent-DTC that the service records of late Shri Tejveer Singh, ex-Conductor, do not contain the particulars of other family members except his widow-late Smt. Sheela Devi. It is also not the case of the respondent-DTC that they verified the service records of Shri Tejveer Singh while considering the claim of the applicant for grant of family pension. The Medial Card (Annexure P-2) issued by the respondent-DTC in favour of Shri Tejveer Singh in March 2006 clearly mentions the details of the family members of Shri Tejveer Singh, which include his wife and six children. The applicant was shown as the youngest child of late Shri Tejveer Singh in March 2006. The certificate of Delhi Secondary School Examination, 2010 issued by the Central Board of Secondary Education on 28.5.2010 (Annexure P-8) clearly describes the applicant as the son of Tejveer Singh and Smt. Sheela Devi, and his date of birth as 14.1.1994. In the above view of the matter, the refusal by the respondent-DTC to grant family pension to the applicant with effect from the date following the date of death of his mother till he attains the age of 25 years, solely on the basis of Form No.14 submitted by the applicant's mother, is unsustainable in the eyes of law.

In the light of what has been discussed above, I direct the respondent-DTC to consider the claim of the applicant for grant of family pension with effect from the date following the date of death of his mother on the basis of service records of late Shri Tejveer Singh and documents submitted by the applicant in support of his claim, and to take appropriate decision by passing a reasoned and speaking order within a period of three months from today. It is needless to say that the decision to be so taken by the respondent-DTC shall be communicated to the applicant within the same period of three months.

Resultantly, the O.A. is allowed to the extent indicated above.

No costs.