Shailesh Kumar vs NORTH CENTRAL RAILWAY
- Court
- Central Administrative Tribunal
CAT, Lucknow Bench OA No. 332/00487 of 2025 Shailesh Kumar Vs. UoI & Ors.
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
LUCKNOW BENCH LUCKNOW
Original Application No. 332/00487/2025
th
Dated, this 29 day of October, 2026
Hon’ble Mr. Pankaj Kumar, Member-Administrative
Shailesh Kumar, aged about 22 years, son of Ram Laut, resident of
village - Annapur, Post - Mustafabad, District - Ambedkar Nagar.
….. Applicant
By Advocate: Shri Somdutta Singh
VERSUS
1. Union of India, through its General Manager, Northern Central
Railway, Allahabad.
2. Divisional Railway Manager, Northern & Central Railway,
Allahabad.
…..Respondents
By Advocate: Shri Rajendra Singh
ORDER (ORAL)
Per Hon’ble Mr. Pankaj Kumar, Member-Administrative
In this case relating to compassionate appointment, the applicant
has sought following reliefs:-
1. To quash the impugned order dated 23.02.2025 passed by the
opposite party no. 2 with all consequential benefits.
2. To direct the opposite parties the applicant application may take a
fresh decision as he is eligible to serve the railway department.
3. To any other relief which the Hon’ble Tribunal may consider
appointment may be granted in favour of the applicant.
4. Cost of application be awarded to the applicant.
2. The facts of the case are that the applicant’s unmarried brother,
Bhimesh Kumar, who was working on the post of Track Maintainer-IV
under the respondents, died in harness on 05.12.2024 leaving behind
his father and mother and four siblings, including the applicant. The
applicant’s application for appointment on compassionate grounds was
rejected by the respondents vide order dated 25.03.2025 on the ground
Page 1 of 5
CAT, Lucknow Bench OA No. 332/00487 of 2025 Shailesh Kumar Vs. UoI & Ors.
that the deceased employee had not declared that the applicant was
dependent on him and also that the applicant was not covered within
the definition of family. Aggrieved, the applicant has preferred this OA.
3. The applicant states that there are six members in the family of
the deceased employee – his father and mother, one married brother,
one married sister, one unmarried sister and the applicant (unmarried
brother); that they live in a house of the size 15 feet by 20 feet; that the
applicant’s father has 6 Biswa agricultural land; that there is no other
moveable or immovable property owned by the family; that the family’s
income is Rs. 14,000 per month; and that the family is suffering from
financial crisis. He contends that in terms of respondents’ instructions
dated 03.02.1981, appointment on compassionate grounds can be
extended to a near relative or blood relative and that under the scheme
for appointment on compassionate grounds brought out by the
Department of Personnel & Training (DoPT), dependent family members
mean ‘brother or sister in case of unmarried government servant’.
4. The respondents contend that in the service records of the
deceased employee, no family member had been declared as dependent.
Further, on the basis of an enquiry conducted by the Welfare Inspector,
it was concluded that the applicant had failed to establish dependency
on the deceased employee. Accordingly, his case was not found eligible
for consideration keeping in view the provisions of RBE No. 70/2014
dated 08.07.2014.
5. Heard both the parties.
6.1 It is noted that the Master Circular No. 16 titled ‘Appointment on
Compassionate Grounds’ has the following provision of relevance to the
case at hand:
“ III. Persons eligible to be appointed on compassionate grounds
Page 2 of 5
CAT, Lucknow Bench OA No. 332/00487 of 2025 Shailesh Kumar Vs. UoI & Ors.
Son/ daughter/ widow/ widower of the employees are eligible to be
appointed on compassionate grounds in the circumstances in which such
appointments are permissible. Where the widow cannot take up
employment and the sons/daughters are minor, the case may be kept
pending till the first son/daughter becomes a major i.e. attains the age of
18 years, subject to time limits as provided under Para (V) of the Circular.
The benefit of compassionate appointments may also be extended
to a "near relative/adopted son/daughter". The eligibility of a near
relative/adopted son/daughter to such appointments will be subject
to the following conditions:
a. Near Relative:
…
A blood relation who is considered to be a bread-winner of the
family can be considered as "near relative" for the purpose of
appointment on compassionate grounds. ”
(emphasis supplied)
It is evident from the above that the brother of the deceased employee,
who is a blood relation, can be considered for appointment on
compassionate grounds if he is considered to be the bread-winner of the
family.
6.2 It is also noted that RBE No. 70/2014 dated 08.07.2014
contains the following provision of relevance in the present controversy:
“Existence of a number of instructions as well as the issue of specific
clause of dependency on the ex-Railway employee have been engaging the
attention of this office for sometime. Accordingly, the matter has been
reviewed by the Board and it has been decided that it should be left to the
discretion of the family concerned in case of death of ex-employee to
request for a job to either spouse or any child {whether son or daughter
(unmarried/married/divorced/widowed)} subject to the condition that the
concerned child will be the bread-winner of the family concerned. Further,
for this purpose instructions issued by this Ministry vide letter issued
under RBE No. 22/2014 dated 04.03.2014 be read in the same spirit.
However, the dependent of an unmarried male/unmarried female
Railway employee dying in harness/retiring on medical grounds,
may be considered for compassionate appointment by the Railway
at its own level, subject to the condition that the candidate
proposed for appointment is shown as dependent on the ex-
employee on the basis of documents such as inclusion/declaration
of names in the pass or in Ration cards etc. The condition of
inclusion in the pass declaration or Ration cards etc. is only a
facilitating factor, and not intended to be a restrictive one. In the
absence of any such documentary proof, the factual position
regarding the extent of the dependency may be got verified by
deputing a Welfare Inspector to inquire into the circumstances. The
relaxation of time limit permissible in case of minor children of those
employees who die in harness would also apply in the case of dependents
of those who die as bachelor/spinster.”
Page 3 of 5
CAT, Lucknow Bench OA No. 332/00487 of 2025 Shailesh Kumar Vs. UoI & Ors.
(emphasis supplied)
It is evident from the above that the dependent of unmarried Railway
employee is eligible for consideration for appointment on compassionate
grounds. Further, the documentary proof of dependent status of person
seeking appointment on compassionate grounds in case of the Railway
employee who was unmarried at the time of his death in harness based
on inclusion of such person in the pass or ration card is only facilitative
and not restrictive; and in the absence of such documentary proof, the
extent of dependency may be verified through the Welfare Inspector.
6.3 It follows from the provisions of Master Circular No. 16 as well
as RBE No. 70/2014 quoted above that the applicant could not have
been considered ineligible for appointment on compassionate grounds
for not being covered in the definition of family of the deceased
employee.
6.4 Coming to the aspect of dependent status, in terms of RBE No.
70/2014, the documentary proof of dependent status of person seeking
appointment on compassionate grounds is only facilitative and not
restrictive and in the absence of such documentary proof, the extent of
dependency may be verified through the Welfare Inspector.
6.5 Perusal of the report dated 30.12.2024 of the Welfare Inspector
reveals that the Welfare Inspector visited the house of the deceased
employee and verified that six family members were living there and
that the deceased employee did not leave behind any movable or
immovable property. However, it is noted that the report did not record
any finding on the dependent status of the applicant; though the report
mentions that the applicant’s father has income of Rs. 15,000 per
month, it does not throw light on the financial condition of the family,
including the means of livelihood of the brothers and sisters living
there.
Page 4 of 5
CAT, Lucknow Bench OA No. 332/00487 of 2025 Shailesh Kumar Vs. UoI & Ors.
6.6 In conclusion, it cannot be said that the Welfare Inspector’s
report dated 30.12.2024 provides a sound basis for reaching the
decision that the applicant has failed to establish his dependency on
the deceased employee.
7.1 In view of the foregoing, the order dated 23.03.2025 is quashed
and set aside.
7.2 The respondents are directed to conduct further enquiry
through the Welfare Inspector on the dependent status of the applicant,
and based on such further enquiry reconsider the applicant’s claim for
appointment on compassionate grounds and decide the same by way of
a reasoned and speaking order to be communicated to the applicant,
preferably within three months of receipt of certified copy of this order.
7.3 This OA is disposed of in above terms.
7.4 Associated MAs also stand disposed of.
7.5 Parties shall bear their own costs.
(Pankaj Kumar)
Warij
Yadav
Digitally
signed by
Warij Yadav
Member (A)
Warij
Page 5 of 5