Divorced daughter entitled to family pension upon proving ineligibility and obtaining NOC from elder widowed sibling.

The applicant, Suchanda Biswas, is the divorced daughter of late Mukunda Behari Biswas, a former employee of the Department of Posts.

Following the death of the employee and subsequently his wife (the applicant's mother) on 20.12.2013, the applicant sought a family pension as a dependent divorced daughter.

The respondents rejected her claim via a speaking order dated 21.11.2022/22.02.2023.

The rejection was grounded on the existence of an elder widowed sister, Smt. Ranjana Roy, whose ineligibility for the pension had not been established and who had not provided a "No Objection Certificate" (NOC) in favor of the applicant.

During proceedings, it was disclosed that the elder sister was an employee of the Central Bank of India and had recently issued an NOC dated 13.02.2026/13.06.2026 favoring the applicant.

1. Whether a divorced daughter is eligible for family pension when an elder widowed sister exists but is financially independent and has provided an NOC.

2. Whether the respondents’ prior rejection of the pension claim based on the non-production of an NOC and proof of the elder sister's ineligibility remains valid in light of new evidence.

The court referred to the CCS (Pension) Rules regarding the eligibility of divorced and widowed daughters for family pension, which generally mandates a sequence of eligibility based on age and dependency.

The court also operated under the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, specifically Section 19, which empowers the Tribunal to review administrative orders and direct authorities to reconsider claims based on factual changes or overlooked evidence.

The Tribunal evaluated the respondents' two primary objections: the elder sister's potential eligibility and the lack of an NOC.

The Tribunal analyzed the reply from Respondent No. 7 (Central Bank of India), which confirmed that the elder sister, Ranjana Roy, was a bank employee.

This evidence directly addressed the "dependency" criterion, as her employment rendered her ineligible for a family pension from her father’s service, thereby clearing the path for the applicant.

Furthermore, the Tribunal took note of the letter dated 13.02.2026, wherein the elder sister explicitly stated she had no objection to the pension being granted to the applicant.

By integrating these facts, the Tribunal found that the technical barriers cited in the respondents' speaking order were now substantively resolved.

The respondents were ordered to take appropriate action in accordance with the law and the Tribunal's observations regarding the elder sister's ineligibility within 90 days of receipt, communicating the final decision via a reasoned order.

No costs were awarded.