Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010233902023 2025:GAU-AS:1982 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/6504/2023 BABY RABHA (BABY RAVA), W/O- SHRI BIKRAM RAVA, EX-ACCOUNTS ASSISTANT (ACCOUNTS, CONSTRUCTION) N.F. RAILWAY, MALIGAON, GUWAHATI, PIN- 781011, R/O- HOUSE NO. 78, LUTUMA KAHILIPARA, P.O. BINOVA NAGAR, P.S. FATASIL AMBARI, GUWAHATI, ASSAM, PIN- 781018. VERSUS THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL AND 9 ORS GUWAHATI BENCH AT GUWAHATI-781005 IN THE DISTRICT OF KAMRUP METRO, ASSAM 2:THE UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF RAILWAYS RAIL BHAWAN NEW DELHI PIN- 110001. 3:THE GENERAL MANAGER (CONSTRUCTION) NORTHEAST FRONTIER RAILWAY MALIGAON GUWAHATI PIN- 781011 ASSAM 4:THE GENERAL MANAGER NORTHEAST FRONTIER RAILWAY MALIGAON GUWAHATI PIN- 781011 ASSAM Page No.# 2/5 5:THE CHIEF PERSONNEL OFFICER NORTHEAST FRONTIER RAILWAY MALIGAON GUWAHATI PIN- 781011 ASSAM 6:THE PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL ADVISER-CUM- THE FINANCIAL ADVISER AND CHIEF ACCOUNTS OFFICER NORTHEAST FRONTIER RAILWAY MALIGAON GHY PIN- 781011 ASSAM 7:THE FINANCIAL ADVISER AND CHIEF ACCOUNTS OFFICER (CONSTRUCTION) NORTHEAST FRONTIER RAILWAY MALIGAON GHY PIN- 781011 ASSAM 8:THE DEPUTY FINANCIAL ADVISER AND CHIEF ACCOUNTS OFFICER (CONSTRUCTION-I) NORTH-EAST FRONTIER RAILWAY MALIGAON GUWAHATI PIN- 781011 ASSAM 9:THE SENIOR ASSISTANT FINANCIAL ADVISER/PENSION NORTHEAST FRONTIER RAILWAY MALIGAON GUWAHATI PIN- 781011 ASSAM 10:THE SENIOR ASSISTANT FINANCIAL ADVISER (CONSTRUCTION) ADMINISTRATION NORTH-EAST FRONTIER RAILWAY MALIGAON GUWAHATI PIN- 781011 ASSAM Page No.# 3/5 For the petitioner : Mr. S. Banerjee, Mr. S. Nath, Advocates For the respondents : Ms. B. Sarma, C.G.C. for Respondent Nos.2 to 10 – B E F O R E – HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. VIJAY BISHNOI HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR 25-02-2025 (Vijay Bishnoi, C.J.) This writ petition is filed by the petitioner being aggrieved with the order dated 16.08.2023 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal (hereinafter to be referred as ‘Tribunal’), Guwahati Bench in O.A. No.229/2022 whereby the original application filed by the petitioner herein was dismissed. 2. The petitioner approached the Tribunal with the prayer to direct the respondents to release the Retirement Gratuity Amount, the Commuted Value of Pension Amount, sanction Permanent Pension Order instead of Provisional Pension Order and the Compulsory Retirement Benefit Deposit (CRBD). 3. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was appointed in the Railway Accounts Department under the N.F. Railway, Maligaon in the year 1978 and superannuated from the post of Accounts Assistant on 31.05.2017. During the course of employment, two criminal cases were registered against the petitioner and the same remained pending till the petitioner superannuated from service and therefore, the Railway Board released the provisional pension to the petitioner as per the provisions of Rule 10 of the Railway Services (Pension) Rules, 1993. Later on, the petitioner was convicted by the competent criminal Page No.# 4/5 courts in the cases pending trial against her vide judgment dated 28.11.2017 and 28.12.2018. After pronouncement of the judgments by the criminal court, the petitioner approached the respondent Railway authorities by filing representation to finalise her pension. However, when no action was taken, she approached the Tribunal by way of filing the Original Application No.124/2020 with the prayer to direct the respondents to finalise her pension entitlement. The Tribunal vide order dated 23.09.2020 disposed of the said original application and directed the respondents to decide the representation filed by the petitioner by passing a reasoned and speaking order within a period of two months. After passing of the said order, the respondents considered the representation of the petitioner and rejected the same vide order dated 08.12.2020. Being aggrieved with the same, the petitioner again approached the Tribunal by way of filing the O.A. No.229/2022, which has been disposed of by the impugned judgment. 4. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and after going through the material available on record, we are of the view that the case of the petitioner for pensionary benefit has to be decided by the respondent Railway authorities while taking into consideration Rule 9 (1) of the Railway Services (Pension) Rules, 1993. 5. In such circumstances, we dispose of this writ petition with the direction to the respondents to take a decision on the question of pension entitlement of the petitioner while taking into consideration Rule 9(1) of the 1993 Rules within a period of 2 (two) months from the date of production of certified copy of this Page No.# 5/5 order. 6. With the above observations and direction, this writ petition is disposed of. JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE Comparing Assistant