Smt. Reeta Dubey & Anr. vs Union Of India & Anr.

Shri Pradeep Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Rishi Kumar, learned counsel for the respondents are present and heard.

By means of this OA, the applicants have sought the following reliefs :

The brief facts of the case, as narrated in the Original Application, are that the applicants, Smt. Reeta Dubey, Wife of Shri Brijesh Kumar Dubey, and Shri Brijesh Kumar Dubey, Son of Late Shri Prem Narain Dubey, are the parents of Late Shri Divyanshu Dubey, who was serving as ESM-III at Budhanpur Station under North Central Railway and died unmarried/bachelor while on duty on 18.07.2025. The applicants claim that they were solely dependent upon the deceased employee for their livelihood and, due to their advanced age, are not in a position to earn sufficient income for their sustenance. After the death of Late Shri Divyanshu Dubey, the applicants approached the respondents for grant of family pension, but their claim was rejected vide impugned order dated 02.09.2025, citing, inter alia, insufficient evidence of dependency, existence of a married daughter, receipt of PM Kisan Nidhi of Rs.6,000/-and alleged income of the applicants, despite their nominee status under NPS. The applicants have, therefore, filed the present Original Application seeking quashing of the impugned order and grant of family pension along with consequential benefits.

The respondents, in their Counter Affidavit, have stated that Late Shri Divyanshu Dubey was appointed as Helper in the Signal Department and was subsequently promoted as Technician-III and posted at Budpura Station, Jhansi Division, and after his death on 18.07.2023, the final settlement dues were paid to his father, Shri Brijesh Kumar Dubey. It has been stated that under the Railway Board’s policy applicable to employees covered under NPS, dependent family pension is admissible only upon fulfilment of the prescribed eligibility criteria. Pursuant to a complaint received through the CPGRAMS portal and in compliance with the order dated 05.07.2025 passed by this Tribunal in O.A. No. 1108/2023, an inquiry and factual verification regarding the applicants’ eligibility for family pension was conducted by the Chief Staff and Welfare Inspector. In the inquiry report dated 27.08.2025, it was found that Shri Brijesh Kumar Dubey, father of the deceased employee, was residing in his ancestral house with his brothers, owned approximately 3.5 bighas of cultivable land and received Rs.6,000/- per year under the Pradhan Mantri Kisan Nidhi Scheme; it was also found that the deceased employee had not submitted any document declaring his parents as dependants, and even in the final settlement forms, the parents were not shown as dependants. Accordingly, the respondents submitted that the applicants did not fall within the category of eligible dependants for family pension and, vide reasoned order dated 02.09.2025, rejected the claim.

Rejoinder affidavit has also been filed by the applicant stating almost the same facts as given in the OA and no new ground has been taken.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the applicants are the aged and dependent parents of Late Shri Divyanshu Dubey, who died unmarried while in service, and are therefore entitled to family pension under the applicable rules. It was argued that the rejection order dated 02.09.2025 is arbitrary, as non-mention of the applicants as dependants in the service records and the father’s ownership of cultivable land/receipt of PM Kisan Nidhi cannot, by themselves, defeat their entitlement. Accordingly, learned counsel prayed for quashing of the impugned order and grant of family pension along with consequential benefits. To substantiate this argument, learned counsel for the applicants relied upon the provision of Sub Rule 10 of Rule 50 of Railway Services (Pension) Rules, 2026, which is reproduced as below :-

Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that after the death of Late Shri Divyanshu Dubey, an inquiry was conducted regarding the applicants’ eligibility for family pension, wherein it was found that the father, Shri Brijesh Kumar Dubey, possessed about 3.5 bighas of cultivable land and received Rs.6,000/- annually under the Pradhan Mantri Kisan Nidhi Scheme, while the deceased employee had not declared his parents as dependants in the service records or final settlement forms. Accordingly, the applicants were held not eligible for family pension and their claim was rejected vide reasoned order dated 02.09.2025. Hence, prayer was made to dismiss the OA.

I have considered the rival submissions and have gone through the entire record.

Admittedly, there is no dispute between the parties that deceased employee namely Naveen Kumar who was working under the respondents’ department died during service period and was unmarried. Since deceased employee was unmarried and died issueless in that situation as per provision of Sub Rule 10 (a) of Rule 50 of Railway Services (Pension) Rule, 2026 parent of the deceased employee would be entitled for family pension. It further appears that the applicant had approached before this Tribunal through the OA No. 1108 of 2023, which was decided on 05.0.2025 and following direction was issued to the respondents, which is reproduced as below :-

Admittedly, Late Shri Divyanshu Dubey, who was working under the respondents, died during service and was unmarried. In such circumstances, the case of the applicants, being the parents of the deceased employee, is required to be considered in terms of Sub-Rule 10 of Rule 50 of the Railway Services (Pension) Rules, 2026, which provides for grant of family pension to the parents where the deceased railway servant is not survived by a widow/widower or an eligible child, subject to the prescribed conditions. It also appears that the applicants had earlier approached this Tribunal in O.A. No. 1108 of 2023, which was disposed of vide order dated 05.07.2025 with a direction to the competent authority to consider their representation for family pension by passing a reasoned and speaking order, while taking into consideration the Government of India Office Memorandum dated 05.03.1998 and RBE No. 08/2020 dated 20.01.2020. In compliance thereof, the impugned order dated 02.09.2025 has been passed rejecting the claim mainly on the ground that the deceased employee had not shown his parents as dependants in the service records/final settlement forms and that the father possessed cultivable land and was receiving Rs.6,000/- per annum under the Pradhan Mantri Kisan Nidhi Scheme. However, mere non-mention of the parents as dependants in the service records or receipt of the aforesaid amount, by itself, cannot be treated as conclusive against the applicants without examining their entitlement in the light of the specific provisions governing family pension to dependent parents. The impugned order, therefore, does not appear to have considered the claim of the applicants in its proper perspective and is accordingly not sustainable. Hence, the O.A. is allowed and the impugned order dated 02.09.2025 is hereby set aside. The competent authority amongst the respondents is directed to allow the claim of the applicants for grant of family pension, particularly in the light of Sub-Rule 10(a) of Rule 50 of the Railway Services (Pension) Rules, 2026 and the aforesaid Government instructions. The aforesaid exercise must be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. If the applicants are found eligible, the consequential benefits shall also be extended to them in accordance with law. No order as to costs.

All associated MAs also stand disposed of.