No DA on pension if employed on compassionate grounds — SC

Railways discovered in 1994 that Rekha was not entitled to draw two dearness reliefs — one on the salary and the other on the family pension– and ordered recovery of the excess DA paid to her.

This was challenged in the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) which held that as she was not re-employed, she was entitled to draw dearness relief on salary as well as on family pension.

Allowing the appeal of the Government against the CAT order, a division bench comprising Justices V N Khare and Y K Sabharwal said the Railways were legally justified in denying the respondent dearness reliefs on her family pension.

The bench said Rekha being a widow of an employee, who died in harness, was given an employment in the Railways on compassionate grounds and added "technically, she has come in employment in substitution of her husband".

It said it was well known that dearness relief or allowance was being paid to compensate the employees against rise in the price index.

"The question that arises is, whether such an employee is entitled to draw two dearness reliefs — on the salary and the other on the family pension paid to him," the Court asked. Answering the query, the bench said, "Under the rules she was not entitled to draw two dearness reliefs."

However, the bench refused to allow the Government to recover the excess dearness relief paid to her terming such excess payment as voluntary. Rekha submitted that she was the sole bread earner for the family and her financial condition was not such to pay back the excess amount she has already drawn.

The bench said "under such circumstances, we are of the view that the recovery of excess pension paid to the respondent is not justified on legal and equitable grounds."