AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
In accordance with the order of the Hon'ble Chairman, Central Administrative Tribunal, dated 10.09.2021 issued under Sub -Section (6) of Section 5 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, this matter can be taken up by a Bench consisting of a single member. Accordingly, this matter is taken up for disposal by this Single Bench.
The applicant has filed this Original Application, seeking the following relief(s):
"a)To quash and/or set aside the impugned office order dated 03.09.2025 issued by the Head of Section/Pension Cell, Rifle Factory, Ishapore wherein under paragraph (iv) they have stated that there is a mismatch in the spelling of the name of her father "NIMAI CHANDRA BHADRA" instead of "NEMAI CHANDRA BHADRA" and on that ground the claim of the applicant has not been processed and the applicant was directed to rectify such mistake being Annexure A-8 of this original application which is totally misconceived and cannot be acceptable in the eye of law and which may be liable to quashed and/or set aside and the respondents be directed to disburse the family pension in favour of the applicant with effect from the date after demise of her mother along with all consequential benefits since your applicant is a physically handicapped person and a divorce daughter and who is 60% permanent physically handicapped and she is entitled to get her father's pension in terms of the office memos issued by the DoP&T being Annexure A-11 and A-12 of this original application.
b)To quash and/or set aside the impugned office order dated 08.01.2026 issued by the Head of Section/Pension Cell, Rifle Factory, Ishapore being Annexure A-10 of this original application which is totally misconceived and only to harass the present applicant, this type of impugned order has been issued by the person concerned who has done in so many cases by rejecting the claim of the family pension on flimsy ground which under any circumstances, cannot be acceptable in the eye of law and which may be liable to quashed and/or set aside and the respondents be directed to disburse the family pension in favour of the applicant who is 60% permanent physically handicapped and who is a divorced daughter of the deceased employee and also she has lost her mother. To save the starvation condition of the applicant and to protect her fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the pension along with all consequential benefits may be disbursed by the respondent authority in favour of the applicant along with interest by quashing and/or setting aside the impugned office orders dated 03.09.2025 and 08.01.2026 being Annexure A-8 and A-10 of this original application.
c)Costs."
3. Facts of the case
The father of the applicant, Late Nemai Chandra Bhadra had retired from service on superannuation on 31.12.1996. He passed away on 02.06.1997. Following his demise, family pension was granted to the applicant's mother, Late Sebika Rani Bhadra, who subsequently passed away on 10.01.2025.
The applicant's name was listed in the particulars of the family of the deceased employee in his service record. The applicant had submitted representations dated 31.07.2025 and 12.12.2025 along with requisite supporting documents (Disability Certificate, Decree of Divorce, Affidavits, Identifications) seeking grant of family pension since according to her she is a physically handicapped person.
The respondent authority, vide impugned communications dated 03.09.2025 and 08.01.2026, have not yet granted family pension to the applicant. On the following grounds in the name of the mother of the applicant:
- The death certificate of the applicant's mother records her husband's name as "Late Nimai Chandra Bhadra" instead of "Late Nemai Chandra Bhadra".
- The applicant has not submitted a Marriage Certificate or equivalent government document establishing her marriage prior to the issue of the decree of divorce between her and her husband.
Aggrieved, the applicant has filed the instant O.A. seeking the above mentioned relief(s).
Hearing
Heard Ld. Counsel for both the parties and considered the material on record.
At hearing, Ld. Counsel for the applicant made the following submission:
The applicant was married on 20.05.1994, but due to marital discord, she had returned to her parental home in 1995 and was dependent on her parents. The marriage was dissolved by a decree of divorce by mutual consent under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act by the Ld. District Judge at Barasat in Matrimonial Suit No. 184 of 2001, vide Order dated 21.08.2001.
The variation in the spelling of the father's name ("Nimai" vs Nemai") in the mother's death certificate is a minor clerical/typographical error made by the concerned civil authority.
The identity of the deceased employee, Late Nemai Chandra Bhadra, is conclusively established from all his service records original PPO (No. FYS/10622/98), family particulars, and the primary death certificate.
It is unnecessary to ask for the production of a separate marriage certificate when a valid, legally binding Divorce Decree issued by a competent Civil Court is already on record.
The applicant fulfils all eligibility criteria for family pension as a disabled child/divorced daughter under the relevant DoP&T OMs dated 16.01.2013 and 26.10.2022.
At hearing, Ld. Counsel for the respondents made the following submission:
The impugned letters are not rejection orders but administrative requisitions seeking clarification and complete documentation.
The Head of Office (HOO) is required under pension rules and guidelines from PCDA (P), Prayagraj, to verify and countersign all authenticating documents to avoid audit objections.
The respondents are bound to ensure proper reconciliation of names and marriage records prior to forwarding the claim to PCDA (P).
Discussion & Findings
It is undisputed that the applicant's service book, the applicant's death certificate, and the original PPO records his name as "Nemai Chandra Bhadra". The substitution of "i" for "e" ("Nimai" instead of "Nemai") in the death certificate of (the wife of the deceased employees) is a typographical/clerical error. Depriving a disabled, destitute applicant of family pension on such grounds proper. The identity of the relationship between the applicant and her father is otherwise fully corroborated by the records and affidavits.
The applicant has submitted a valid decree of divorce dated 21.08.2001 issued by the competent Judicial Court (District Judge, Barasat North 24 Pargans District). A decree of divorce presupposes and legally establishes the prior existence of the marriage between the named parties. Further the decree of divorce dated 21.08.2001 states that the “marriage in between the parties held on 20.05.1994 stand dissolved with effect from this date”. It is therefore not necessary to ask the applicant to produce her marriage certificate when a judicial decree of dissolution of the same marriage exists.
Provisions for grant of family pension in the CCS (Pension) Rules have been made for disabled and dependent daughters with the objective welfare of vulnerable individuals providing facing destitution. Respondent authorities ought to adopt a pragmatic, compassionate, and constructive approach in dealing with such matters.
In view of the above discussion, the impugned communications dated 03.09.2025 and 08.01.2026 issued by Respondent No. 5/6, in so far as they insist on a corrected death certificate and a separate marriage certificate, are set aside. The matter is remanded back to the respondent authorities with the following directions:
The applicant shall submit an Affidavit affirmed before a Judicial Magistrate 1st Class affirming that “Late Nimai Chandra Bhadra” as mentioned in her mother’s death certificate and “Late Nemai Chandra Bhadra” refer to one and the same person, i.e., to her father.
Upon receipt of the said Affidavit, Respondent No. 5 or any other competent respondent authority is directed to accept the documents on record, verify the other eligibility requirements as laid down in the CCS (Pension) Rules, 2021 for grant of family pension. If after such verification, the applicant is found to be eligible for grant of family pension in all respects the family pension claim of the applicant will be forwarded by the Respondent No. 5 or any other competent authority within a period of six (06) weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.
Respondent No. 8 shall thereafter issue the necessary Pension Payment Order (PPO) and disburse the arrears of family pension along with regular monthly pension in favour of the applicant within a further period of four (04) weeks.
With these directions, the O.A. is disposed of without any order as to cost.