Amita Devi v. The Union Of India And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5599 of 2018 =========================================================== Amita Devi Wife of late Surendra Ram Resident of Village- Shokhara, P.S. Phulwaria, in the District of Begusarai.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The Union of India, through the General Manager, East Central Railway, Hajipur.

2. The General Railway Manager(Personnel) Sonepur Division, East Central Railway, Hajipur.

3. The Senior Section Engineer, East Central Railway, Barauni. .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Braj Nandan Kumar Tiwary, Adv. For the Railways : Mr. Naresh Dixit, Adv. =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI and HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI) Date: 15-05-2018 Heard counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the Railway.

If the admitted position is that the husband of the petitioner did not become a regular employee of the Railways and he was working as a substitute Khalasi, therefore, in absence of regularization of his service, no family pension can be authorized in favour of the wife or the children.

It is in this background that the Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna dismissed the O.A. 854 of 2010 vide order dated 26.02.2014 which is subject matter of challenge.

Patna High Court CWJC No.5599 of 2018 dt.15-05-2018 2/2 It has come in the pleadings itself that despite the status of the husband of the present petitioner, the Railway authorities especially the General Manager has granted appointment to the present petitioner on compassionate ground, therefore, it is not that the present petitioner and the family has not been taken care of by the Railways.

The Rule cannot be bent to accommodate persons merely because their case is hard.

We do not find any infirmity with the decision rendered by the Tribunal which requires rectification.

The position and stand taken by the respondent Railways in the counter affidavit is supported by necessary rules and regulations along with a judicial decision which has been rendered by the Apex Court, a copy of which is annexed as Annexure-C to the counter affidavit.

Writ has no merit. It is dismissed.

(Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J) (Nilu Agrawal, J) Rajesh/Devendra AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date18.05.2018 Transmission Date NA