In January 2009, the Revisional Authority ordered that the penalty of Damodaran's DCRG would be reduced to 50% instead of the earlier 100 per cent. (File Photo)
Ruling that the pension received by the widow of a deceased railway employee “cannot be regarded as an estate left behind” to clear dues, the Gujarat High Court rejected the petition of the Indian Railways, which was seeking a recovery of penalty dues amounting to Rs 50.60 lakh imposed on the deceased employee following disciplinary proceedings in 2004.
A Division Bench of Justice N S Sanjay Gowda and Justice J L Odedra of the Gujarat HC was hearing a petition filed by the Union of India, Divisional Railway Manager and Senior Divisional Engineer (Railways) challenging a 2012 order of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), which had set aside the order of the Railways directing the recovery of “penalty dues” imposed on deceased railway employee, K N Damodaran, from the family pension of his widow Samjathaben.
The CAT had set aside the recovery order on the ground that the same was not in consonance with Rule 15 of the Railway Services (Pension) Rules, 1993, the judgment notes.
The case stemmed from disciplinary proceedings initiated against the employee, who was charged with “gross negligence and lack of devotion to duty” and failure to maintain proper accounts and ensuring “safe custody of stores under his charge”, the judgment notes.
The disciplinary authority had proceeded to impose a penalty of withholding the entire Death-cum-Retirement Gratuity (DCRG) sum in 2006, and also directed Damodaran to pay Rs 50.60 lakh within 15 days which was stated to be “the amount due to the Railways on account of shortage of stock” and one month’s salary “towards contribution”.
Damodaran had challenged the order in the CAT. However, he passed away in August 2008, before the CAT passed the order which directed the Railways to “consider the application as a revision petition and to pass an order within a stipulated time frame”, the HC judgment notes.
In January 2009, the Revisional Authority ordered that the penalty of Damodaran’s DCRG would be reduced to 50% instead of the earlier 100 per cent. Although his heirs challenged the order before the CAT, the application was dismissed in 2009 and the “penalty of reduction of 50% of DCRG for misconduct was passed and confirmed by the CAT, and the order has attained finality. In November 2012, the Railways directed that the outstanding amount be recovered from the family pension of his widow, Samjathaben.
Story continues below this ad
Before the High Court, the Railways argued that recovery was “perfectly justified” as it pertained to a “loss to the public exchequer”. The Railways contended that the recovery of the amount was sought to be made from the “dearness relief” and not the basic family pension under the Rules, and that “the widow of the former employee would be legally bound to clear the outstanding amount of her husband.”
Rejecting this contention, HC held that “(The Rule 15) enables the Railways to proceed against its employee… for recovery of its dues… (but) cannot be used to proceed against the family pension that is granted to the legal heir of the deceased employee … (the Rule) explicitly states that the Railways can recover only from the dues of the pensionary benefits of the employee…”
The Bench further underscored that under Rule 98, any dues of a deceased employee “can be recovered only from the amount of DCRG payable to the family,” and does not contain any provisions enabling the Railways to recover any amount from the family pension.
The HC, in its judgment states, “A family pension is granted to enable the surviving legal heirs of the employee to sustain themselves, and it cannot be treated as a money available for recovery to satisfy the dues to the Railways… It is obvious that the reason why no such rule has been provided is that the Railways were conscious of the fact that legal heirs of an employee cannot be made liable for any dues of the employee.”
Story continues below this ad
The judgment also stated that family pension “cannot be regarded as an estate left behind by the deceased employee”. Finding no legal basis for the recovery, the court held that the Tribunal was “justified” in setting aside the Railways’ order and ruled that the family pension, including dearness relief, is “immune from any recovery.”
The petition was accordingly dismissed, with the court directing that any amount recovered during the pendency of the case be returned to the respondent.
Aditi Raja is an Assistant Editor with The Indian Express, stationed in Vadodara, Gujarat, with over 20 years in the field. She has been reporting from the region of Central Gujarat and Narmada district for this newspaper since 2013, which establishes her as a highly Authoritative and Trustworthy source on regional politics, administration, and critical socio-economic and environmental issues.
Expertise:
Core Authority & Specialization: Her reporting is characterized by a comprehensive grasp of the complex factors shaping Central Gujarat, which comprises a vast tribal population, including:
Politics and Administration: In-depth analysis of dynamics within factions of political parties and how it affects the affairs in the region, visits of national leaders making prominent statements, and government policy decisions impacting the population on ground.
Crucial Regional Projects: She consistently reports on the socio-economic and political impact of infrastructure projects in the region, especially the Statue of Unity, the Sardar Sarovar Project on the Narmada River, the Mumbai-Ahmedabad High Speed Rail bullet train project as well as the National Highway infrastructure.
Social Justice and Human Rights: Her reporting offers deep coverage of sensitive human-interest topics, including gender, crime, and tribal issues. Her reports cover legal proceedings from various district courts as well as the Gujarat High Court (e.g., the Bilkis Bano case remission, POCSO court orders, Public Interest Litigations), the plight of tribal communities, and broader social conflicts (e.g., Kheda flogging case).
Local Impact & Disaster Reporting: Excels in documenting the immediate impact of events on communities, such as the political and civic fallout of the Vadodara floods, the subsequent public anger, and the long-delayed river redevelopment projects, Harni Boat Tragedy, Air India crash, bringing out a blend of stories from the investigations as well as human emotions.
Special Interest Beat: She tracks incidents concerning Non-Resident Gujaratis (NRIs) including crime and legal battles abroad, issues of illegal immigration and deportations, as well as social events connecting the local Gujarati experience to the global diaspora. ... Read More
