Step-Son Not "Family" Under Railway Pension Rules, Holds Madras HC [Read Order]

Chennai: The Madras High Court has set aside an order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chennai Bench, which had granted family pension to the step-son of a deceased Railway employee, holding that a step-son does not fall within the definition of "family" under Rule 75 of the Railway Services (Pension) Rules, 1993, and is therefore ineligible to receive family pension. 

A Division Bench of Justice S.M. Subramaniam and Justice N. Senthilkumar allowed a writ petition filed by the Union of India and the Senior Divisional Personnel Officer, Southern Railway, Chennai Division, against the Tribunal's order dated 07.06.2023.

The respondent, step-son of Late G. Kalaiselvi, a Railway employee who died in service on 24.09.2008, had approached the Tribunal seeking family pension under the Railway Services (Pension) Rules, 1993. The Tribunal allowed his application in O.A.No.409 of 2017, prompting the Railways to challenge the order before the High Court.

The Standing Counsel appearing for the Railways submitted that gratuity due to the deceased employee had already been settled in the respondent's favour under Rule 70 of the Pension Rules, but that this did not make him eligible for family pension, which is governed by a separate and distinct definition of "family" under Rule 75. It was pointed out that although the Tribunal had taken note of the Rules, it had erroneously granted family pension by relying on Rule 70, a provision that has no application to claims for family pension.

Examining Rule 75, which incorporates the Family Pension Scheme for Railway Servants, 1964, the Court noted that "family" as defined under Sub-Rule 19(b), covers the surviving spouse, a judicially separated spouse not held guilty of adultery, and sons and unmarried daughters below twenty-five years of age, including those born or legally adopted before retirement. A step-son does not figure within this definition.

The Court observed that while the Pension Rules permit a Government servant to nominate any person to receive gratuity, family pension stands on a different footing and must be granted strictly in accordance with the statutory definition of "family." Since a step-son is not covered by that definition, the Court held that the Tribunal's order granting family pension to the respondent could not be sustained.

Accordingly, the order dated 07.06.2023 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Madras Bench, in O.A.No.409 of 2017 was set aside, and the writ petition was allowed, with no order as to costs. The connected miscellaneous petitions were closed.

Case Title: Union of India and Another vs. The Registrar, The Central Administrative Tribunal, Chennai Bench and Another, W.P. No. 26142 of 2024

[Read Order]