![COURT DIRECTS RAILWAYS TO DECIDE FAMILY PENSION APPEAL FOR MISSING EMPLOYEE'S MOTHER WITHIN TWO MONTHS.. Smt. Chenimai Devi v. The Union of India [O.A. No. 040/00188/2024]. Central Administrative Tribunal. LawLens](/stories/thumbnails/court-directs-railways-to-decide-family-pension-appeal-for-missing-employee-s-mother-withi-57c697084f5846fb83f9fafdc28b9d2a.webp)
Facts
The applicant's son, Deep Jyoti Nath, who was appointed as DSL/Elect/Tech III under N.F. Railways on 15.06.2006, went missing on 16.11.2016 while visiting Lumding.
Source reference: p.2An FIR was lodged on 02.02.2017, registered as Lumding 21/2017 under Section 365 of IPC.
Source reference: p.2The investigation concluded with a final report (Lumding P.S. FR No. 110/2021) stating that the missing person could not be traced.
Source reference: p.2Deep Jyoti Nath was unmarried at the time of his disappearance.
Source reference: p.2A Departmental Proceeding initiated on 22.04.2019 led to an Enquiry Officer's report dated 21.04.2021 stating that the enquiry could not be completed due to non-communication by Deep Jyoti Nath.
Source reference: p.2-3On 12.07.2023, the Officer-in-charge, Lumding Police Station, certified that the missing person could not be traced.
Source reference: p.3The applicant, being Deep Jyoti Nath's mother, filed an appeal dated 01.08.2023 with the Divisional Railway Manager (Mechanical), N.F. Railway, requesting family pension.
Source reference: p.3This appeal remains pending.
Source reference: p.3Issues
Whether the applicant's pending appeal/representation for family pension, dated 01.08.2023, should be considered and decided by the respondents within a time-bound manner.
Source reference: p.3-4Law Applied
No specific rule of law was applied to decide the merits of the case.
Source reference: p.3-4The Tribunal acted within its inherent powers to direct authorities to consider and dispose of pending representations in a time-bound manner, a common procedural directive in administrative law.
Source reference: p.3-4The decision was based on the consent of the parties for such a procedural direction.
Source reference: p.3Reasoning
The court, with the consent of both parties, determined that the applicant's pending representation warranted consideration by the competent authority.
Source reference: p.3-4Acknowledging the facts of the son's disappearance, the police investigation, and the unresolved departmental inquiry, the court opted for a procedural direction rather than a substantive ruling on the merits.
Source reference: p.2-4The court directed the respondents to treat the Original Application as a representation and pass a reasoned order within a specified timeframe, adhering to applicable rules and circulars.
Source reference: p.4This approach allows the administrative authorities to evaluate the family pension claim in detail first, consistent with established administrative processes.
Source reference: p.4Holding
The Original Application was disposed of with a direction to the respondents/competent authority to consider the pending appeal/representation dated 01.08.2023 (Annexure-A/1) within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the Order.
The respondents are required to pass a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with applicable rules, circulars, and OMs, and to intimate the applicant of the decision within one week thereafter.
Source reference: p.4The Tribunal explicitly stated that no orders were passed on the merits of the matter.
Source reference: p.4Acts & Sections Cited
1 provisions across 1 statute referred to in this judgment. Each provision opens on LawLens.
Indian Penal Code, 18601
Original Court PDF
Smt. Chenimai Devi v. The Union of India [O.A. No. 040/00188/2024]
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
