Smt Renu Srivastava vs D/o Post

1

(Reserved on 02.09.2026)

Central Administrative Tribunal, Allahabad Bench,
Allahabad

th
This the _27 day of _October, 2026


Hon’ble Mr. Rajnish Kumar Rai, Member (J)



Original Application No. 583 of 2020

Smt Renu Srivastava aged about 50 years W/o Late Ajay Srivatava,
R/o Village Harion, Post Bhadhohi District Bhadhohi.
……….. Applicant.

By Advocate: Mr. Santosh Kumar Kushwaha.


Versus
1. Union of India Through Secretary Ministry of Communication
Government of India, New Delhi.
2. Senior Superintendent (Post & Telegraph Department)
Varanasi.
3. The Senior Post Master Head Post Office Varanasi.
4. General Manager(Finance) Postal Accounts Department, U.P.
Region, Aliganj, Lucknow.
……….. Respondents.


By Advocates: Mr. Raj Pal Singh.

Order
The applicant has approached this Tribunal under Section
19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, seeking
determination and release of family pension along with arrears
Shakuntala Singh

2

and interest. The reliefs prayed for by the applicant are as
under:-
“i). To allow this application and direct the
respondent postal department to determine and
release the family pension of the applicant.
ii). To direct the postal department to pay the arrears
of family pension of the applicant from October
2014 along with interest till the date of the actual
payment.
iii). To issue any other order or direction in favour of
the applicant which this Hon’ble Tribunal deems
fit and proper in the present facts and
circumstances of the case, so as to secure the ends
of justice.
iv) Award cost of the instant application to the
applicant.”
2. The brief facts of the case are that the applicant, Smt. Renu
Srivastava, has filed the present Original Application seeking a
direction to the respondents to determine and release her
family pension and pay the arrears from October 2014, along
with interest. The applicant is the widow of Late Ajay Kumar
Srivastava, who was appointed as a Gramin Dak Sevak (GDS) in
the Postal Department in 1982. He was subsequently promoted
to the post of Postman in 2012 and, after completing the
prescribed training, was promoted to the post of Multi-Tasking
Staff (MTS). However, he died on 04.06.2012 while serving at the
Head Post Office, Varanasi Cantt. Following his death, the
applicant was sanctioned provisional family pension with effect
from 05.06.2012, and she also received certain amounts under
the Postal Life Insurance policies. The family pension was paid
to her up to October 2014, after which the payment was stopped
without prior notice. Despite making inquiries and submitting
the required documents, the applicant could not get her family
pension restored. The respondents subsequently informed her
that the relevant medical certificate and other service records of
Shakuntala Singh

3

her deceased husband were not available. Aggrieved by the
stoppage of family pension, the applicant has approached this
Tribunal seeking the aforesaid reliefs.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the
applicant is the legally entitled widow of the deceased
employee and had been receiving provisional family pension
regularly until October 2014. The payment was stopped on the
ground that certain medical certificates and service records of
her deceased husband were not available, despite the fact that
he had served in the Postal Department for several years and
had completed the prescribed formalities for promotion. It was
further submitted that the applicant had made repeated efforts
to obtain the relevant documents and had submitted the
available records to the concerned authorities, but her
grievance remained unresolved. Learned counsel contended
that the respondents cannot deny the applicant her legitimate
family pension merely because the department has failed to
trace or maintain the relevant service records. It was also
submitted that family pension is a right and not a bounty, and its
arbitrary stoppage has caused serious financial hardship to the
applicant, who is an elderly widow. Accordingly, learned
counsel prayed that the respondents be directed to restore and
release her family pension and pay the arrears from October
2014, along with interest.
4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submitted
that the husband of the applicant, Late Ajay Kumar Srivastava,
had worked as a GDS Packer before being promoted to the post
of MTS at Varanasi Cantt. He joined the post of MTS on
Shakuntala Singh

4

09.05.2012 after completing the prescribed training. However,
he died on 04.06.2012, after serving in the MTS post for only 27
days. It was further submitted that the process of opening his
PRAN account under the National Pension System could not be
completed before his death. The respondents stated that
provisional family pension was sanctioned to the applicant on
compassionate grounds, but its payment was subsequently
stopped on the instructions of the competent authority.
According to the respondents, the medical certificate of the
deceased employee was necessary for finalising the family
pension claim under Rule 54(2)(ii) of the CCS (Pension) Rules,
1972, and the concerned offices had reported that the requisite
medical certificate was not available. Therefore, the
respondents contended that the applicant’s family pension
could not be finalised in the absence of the required certificate
and prayed for dismissal of the Original Application.
5. In the counter reply, learned counsel for the respondents
further submitted that the applicant’s family pension claim had
been examined by the concerned authorities, and the matter
was referred to the General Manager (Finance), U.P. Circle,
Lucknow, for necessary action. It was stated that the concerned
offices had reported the non-availability of the medical
certificate of the deceased employee and that the applicant had
also been asked to provide the requisite documents. The
respondents further submitted that, under Rule 54(2)(ii) of the
CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972, the medical certificate was
necessary for finalisation of the pension claim, particularly
because the deceased employee had served in the MTS post for
less than one year. They denied that the action taken by the
Shakuntala Singh

5

department was arbitrary or illegal and maintained that the
family pension had been stopped in accordance with the
applicable rules and instructions. On these grounds, the
respondents opposed the relief sought by the applicant and
prayed that the Original Application be dismissed.
6. In the rejoinder affidavit, learned counsel for the applicant
reiterated the averments made in the Original Application and
denied the contrary submissions made in the counter reply. It
was submitted that the respondents cannot deny family pension
merely on the ground that the medical certificate of the
deceased employee is not available, particularly when the
applicant cannot be expected to produce such a certificate after
his death and the relevant records are required to be
maintained by the department. Learned counsel further
submitted that the stoppage of family pension was arbitrary and
illegal and that the respondents had failed to address the main
issue raised by the applicant. Accordingly, learned counsel
prayed that the Original Application be allowed and the
respondents be directed to release the applicant’s family
pension along with arrears from October 2014.
7. Learned counsel for the applicant has relied upon Rule
54(2)(ii) of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972, under the heading
“Family Pension, 1964”, and submitted that the said provision
deals with the entitlement to family pension where a
Government servant dies before completing one year of
continuous service, subject to the condition that he was
medically examined and declared fit for Government service
Shakuntala Singh

6

by the appropriate medical authority immediately before his
appointment.
8. I have considered the submissions made by Mr. Santosh
Kumar Kushwaha, learned counsel for the applicant, and Mr. Raj
Pal Singh, learned counsel for the respondents, and have
carefully examined the pleadings, documents and other
material available on record.
9. The main issue for consideration is whether the applicant’s
claim for family pension can be rejected on the ground that the
medical certificate and certain service records of her deceased
husband are not available. It is not disputed that Late Ajay
Kumar Srivastava had served in the Postal Department as a GDS
before his promotion to the post of MTS and died on 04.06.2012,
after joining the MTS post on 09.05.2012. It is also evident from
the pleadings that provisional family pension was sanctioned to
the applicant and was paid up to October 2014. These
circumstances require consideration while examining the
reasons for discontinuation of the pension and the applicant’s
entitlement under the applicable rules.
10. The respondents have opposed the claim on the grounds
that the deceased employee served in the MTS post for only 27
days, his PRAN account could not be opened before his death,
and the requisite medical certificate was not available.
However, these grounds need to be examined in the light of the
deceased employee’s previous service as a GDS, his
subsequent promotion to the post of MTS, the relevant service
records and the applicable pension rules. The non-availability
of the medical certificate or other departmental records cannot,
Shakuntala Singh

7

by itself, conclude the matter without proper examination of the
applicant’s claim in accordance with the applicable rules.
11. It is relevant to refer to Rule 54(2)(ii) of the CCS (Pension)
Rules, 1972, under the heading “Family Pension, 1964”. The
relevant provision reads as follows:-
“(ii) before completion of one year of continuous
service, provided the deceased Government
servant concerned immediately prior to his
appointment to the service or post was examined
by the appropriate medical authority and declared
fit by that authority for Government service; or”
12. A perusal of the aforesaid provision shows that the grant of
family pension where a Government servant dies before
completing one year of continuous service is subject to the
prescribed condition regarding medical examination and
fitness for Government service immediately before
appointment. In the present case, the respondents have relied
upon the non-availability of the medical certificate of the
deceased employee. However, the deceased employee had
initially joined the Postal Department as a GDS in 1982 and was
subsequently promoted to the post of MTS in 2012 under the
departmental quota, in accordance with the applicable
recruitment rules. His previous service from 1982 up to his
promotion to the post of MTS is, therefore, a relevant
consideration. It is also the respondents’ case that provisional
family pension at the rate of ₹ 3,500/- per month plus Dearness
Allowance was sanctioned to the applicant with effect from
05.06.2012. The objection regarding non-availability of the
medical certificate, as referred to in the departmental
correspondence dated 23.07.2019, requires consideration in the
light of the available service records and the earlier sanction of
Shakuntala Singh

8

provisional family pension. The applicant cannot be expected to
produce a medical certificate that is not available in the
departmental records, and the consequences of such non-
availability cannot be placed upon the deceased employee’s
widow without proper examination of the matter.
13. In view of the foregoing discussion, the Original
Application is disposed of with a direction to the
respondents/competent authority to reconsider the applicant’s
claim for family pension and arrears thereof, along with interest
at the rate of 6% per annum, in the light of the deceased
employee’s past service, the earlier sanction of provisional
family pension and the applicable rules. The competent
authority shall pass a reasoned and speaking order within three
months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.
14. Accordingly, the Original Application is disposed of in the
aforesaid terms. There shall be no order as to costs.
15. All pending Miscellaneous Applications, if any, stand
disposed of.

( Rajnish Kumar Rai )
Member (J)

/Shakuntala/

Shakuntala Singh