Disposed

Neha Kumari v. South Eastern Railway

CAT14 Sept 2026O.A./598/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order grants relief to the applicant by directing the respondents to consider and dispose of her family pension representation within three months, passing a reasoned speaking order while complying with natural justice principles regarding other potential claimants.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the competent authority to consider and dispose of the representation dated 16.01.2026 within three months by passing a reasoned and speaking order after affording an opportunity of heari

Neha Kumari vs South Eastern Railway — Pension and Retirement Benefits | CAT (2026)

¶1

¶2

O.A. No. 051/00598/2026

¶3

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PATNA BENCH CIRCUIT SITTING AT RANCHI O.A. No. 051/00598/2026

¶4

Date of order :- 14.09.2026

¶5

C O R A M

¶6

HON’BLE MR. KUMAR RAJESH CHANDRA, MEMBER [A]

¶7

Neha Kumari, Aged about 19 years, D/o Late Baneshwar Mahato @ Late Baneshwar Mahto, Resident of Village- Heslabera, POMerha, PS- Angara, District- Ranchi.

¶8

………Applicant.

¶9

Versus

¶10

The Union of India through its General Manager, South Eastern Railway, Office of Dumaryrie Area, North Colony, PO & PSGarden Reach, Kolkata, West Bengal, Pin- 700043.

¶11

The General Manager, South Eastern Railway, Office at Dumaryrie Area, North Colony, PO and PS- Garden Reach, Kolkata, West Bengal, Pin- 700043.

¶12

The Divisional Railway Manager, South Eastern Railway, Ranchi Division, Office at Hatia Railway Station, PO- Hatia, PS- Jagarnathpur, Dist.- Ranchi, Jharkhand, Pin- 834003.

¶13

The Senior Divisional Personnel Officer, South Eastern Railway, Ranchi Division, Office at Hatia Railway Station, POHatia, PS- Jagarnathpur, Dist.- Ranchi, Jharkhand, Pin- 834003.

¶14

The Senior Divisional Personnel Manager, South Eastern Railway, Ranchi Division, Office at Hatia Railway Station, POHatia, PS- Jagarnathpur, Dist.- Ranchi, Jharkhand, Pin- 834003.

¶15

The Senior Divisional Operation Manager, South Eastern Railway, Ranchi Division office at Hatia Railway Station, POHatia, PS- Jagarnathpur, Dist.- Ranchi, Jharkhand, Pin- 834003.

¶16

SURYAR Digitally signed by SURYAROOP OOP KABIKABI

¶17

¶18

O.A. No. 051/00598/2026

¶19

The Assistant Divisional Finance Manager, South Eastern Railway (Pension), Ranchi Railway Division, Office at Hatia Railway Station, P.O.- Hatia, P.S.- Jagarnathpur, Dist.- Ranchi, Jharkhand, PIN-834003.

¶20

Nita Devi @ Nita Mahato, 2^nd wife of Late Baneshwar Mahato, daughter of Haripada Mahato, Resident of Village- Heslabera, P.O.- Merha, P.S.- Angara, District- Ranchi, presently residing at Tulin, P.O.- Tulin, P.S.- Jhalda, Dist.- Purulia, West Bengal, PIN-723212.

¶21

……..Respondents

¶22

For Applicant:Mr. S.B. Gupta, Counsel For Respondents:Mr. Rajendra Krishna, Sr. CGSC

¶23

ORDER (Oral)

¶24

[PER:- MR. KUMAR RAJESH CHANDRA, MEMBER(A)]

¶25

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

¶26

At the outset, learned counsel for the applicant submits that, in terms of the prayer made under paragraph 8(C) of the relief clause , the applicant is seeking a direction upon the respondents for disposal of her representation dated 16.01.2026 , whereby she has raised her claim for family pension. It is submitted that the principles of natural justice would be duly met if the said representation is considered and disposed of by the competent authority by passing a reasoned and speaking order within a stipulated period.

¶27

SURYAR Digitally signed by SURYAROOP OOP KABIKABI

¶28

¶29

O.A. No. 051/00598/2026

¶30

Learned counsel appearing for the respondents has no objection to the disposal of the Original Application in the aforesaid terms.

¶31

However, before proceeding further, it is necessary to take note of a related proceeding. One of the applicants, namely, Namita Kumar , has also filed OA No. 562/2026 , which is listed today, wherein certain retiral benefits, including DCRG, have been claimed. In the said Original Application, the second wife of the deceased employee and her children, whose rights may be affected by the relief sought therein, were not impleaded as parties. Consequently, the said Original Application has been dismissed today on the ground of non-joinder of necessary parties.

¶32

The aforesaid circumstance assumes significance in the present matter as well. Any adjudication or determination concerning family pension or other retiral/terminal benefits of the deceased employee may have a bearing upon the competing or corresponding rights, if any, of other members of the family. Such persons, whose rights may be prejudicially affected by an order passed in the matter, cannot be deprived of an opportunity of hearing without due compliance with the principles of natural justice.

¶33

Nevertheless, the present Original Application, insofar as the prayer under paragraph 8(C) is concerned, is confined to a direction for consideration and disposal of the representation dated 16.01.2026 . No adjudication on the competing claims to family pension is being undertaken by this Tribunal at this stage.

¶34

SURYAR Digitally signed by SURYAROOP OOP KABIKABI

¶35

¶36

O.A. No. 051/00598/2026

¶37

In the circumstances, I am of the considered view that the ends of

¶38

justice would be met if the competent authority of the respondents is directed to consider and dispose of the aforesaid representation in accordance with the applicable law, rules and procedure, after taking into account all relevant facts and circumstances and, where necessary, after affording an opportunity of hearing to all persons whose rights are likely to be affected by the decision.

¶39

Accordingly, the present Original Application is disposed of with a direction to the competent authority of the respondents to consider and dispose of the representation dated 16.01.2026 submitted by the applicant, strictly in accordance with the applicable law, rules and procedures, by passing a reasoned and speaking order , preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production

¶40

of a copy of this order before the competent authority.

¶41

It is made clear that, before taking a final decision, the competent authority shall ensure compliance with the principles of natural justice and shall take into consideration the claims, if any, of other persons whose rights in respect of the family pension or other consequential benefits may be affected by such decision.

¶42

It is further made clear that this Tribunal has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the claim of the applicant for family pension or on the entitlement of any other claimant . All questions of fact and law, including the respective rights and entitlement of the

¶43

SURYAR Digitally signed by SURYAROOP OOP KABIKABI

¶44

¶45

O.A. No. 051/00598/2026

¶46

concerned parties, are left open for consideration and determination by

¶47

the competent authority in accordance with law.

¶48

11.The Original Application stands disposed of in the above terms .

¶49

No order as to costs . Sd/-

¶50

(Kumar Rajesh Chandra) Member (A)

¶51

Srk.

¶52

SURYAR Digitally signed by SURYAROOP OOP KABIKABI

Neha Kumari v. South Eastern Railway

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Neha Kumari v. South Eastern Railway

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shishir Kumar Sirvastava vs Union of India

Vijay Kumar vs Union of India

Dilip Kumar Pandey vs Union of India

Atul Mishra vs Secretary

Mohd Iqbal Shah vs Ut of Jk through Commissioner Secretary School Education Department

Gulam Mohi Ud Din Khan vs Jal Shakti Department

Habibullah Khan vs Home Department

Smt Archana Devi vs Union of India