1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 6875 of 2025 1 - Smt. Munni Bai W/o Late Abdul Munaf Aged About 80 Years R/o Raza Nagar, Ward No. 18, In Front Of Tekari Wale Baba Mazar, Dongargarh, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Union of India Through General Manager, South East Central Railway, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. 2 - The Divisional Railway Manager South East Central Railway, Nagpur. 3 - The Divisional Personnel Officer South East Central Railway, Nagpur. 4 - The Secretary Railway Board, Rail Bhawan, Raisina Road, New Delhi 110001. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner (s) : Shri Pranav Tiwari, Advocate. For Respondent No.1 : Shri Ramakant Mishra, Deputy Solicitor General. Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J Order on Board 15.07. 202 5 1. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition claiming the following reliefs. “ii. That, the Hon’ble court may be kind enough to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction to respondents, especially the Divisional Railway Manager and Senior Divisional Personal Officer, South East Central Railway, Nagpur, to forthwith release and disburse the family pension and all consequential benefits due to the petitioner as the legally declared wife of late Abdul Munaf. iii. That, the Hon’ble court may be kind enough to direct the respondents to honor and implement the decree passed by the Hon’ble Civil Judge, Class-I Dongargarh, dated 17.05.2003 and 2 treat the petitioner as the rightful legal heir and widow of late Abdul Munaf for all service and pension related benefits. iv. That, the Hon’ble court may be kind enough to direct the respondents to pay arrears of family pension from the date it it became due, along with applicable interest, and ensure regular payment of family pension to the petitioner henceforth.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is the widow of Late Abdul Munaf. Her husband was a Railway employee, voluntarily retired on 04-08-1992, and was granted a pension. He died on 04-09-2001. The petitioner, being the second wife of the deceased retired employee, claimed the family pension after the decree passed by the Civil Court on 17-05-2003, with respect to her status as the wife of the deceased employee. The Railway authorities have denied the family pension to the petitioner by saying that they were not the party to the Civil Suit. The petitioner is an 80-year-old lady and is claiming the family pension. Therefore, appropriate relief may be granted to her. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the Respondent/Union of India, opposed and a preliminary objection is taken regarding the maintainability of the present writ petition. He would submit that the matter pertains to the family pension from the Railway Department and, therefore, as per Section 14 (c) of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985, the jurisdiction to decide the dispute is with the Central Administrative Tribunal, and the writ petition before this Court is not maintainable. He would also submit a copy of Appendix-VI, made under Rule 154(b) of the Central Administrative Tribunal Rules of Practice, 1993, in which Sr. No. 32 is the Railway services, which are regulated by the Central Government. And therefore, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed for want of jurisdiction and the petitioner may 3 approach to the Central Administrative Tribunal for redressal of her grievances. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents annexed to the petition. 5. Admittedly, the husband of the petitioner was a Railway employee and the petitioner is claiming family pension from the Railway Department. Section 14 (c) of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985, provides the jurisdiction, powers and authority of the Central Administrative Tribunals, which reads as under:- Section 14(c)- all service matters pertaining to service in connection with the affairs of the Union concerning a person appointed to any service or post referred to in sub clause(ii) or sub clause (iii) of clause (b), being a person whose services have been placed by a State Govt. or any local or other authority or any corporation (or society) or other body, at the disposal of the Central Government for such appointment.” 6. The Railway services are regulated by the Central Government as provided in the list of Appendix-VI, made under Rule 154(b) of the Central Administrative Tribunal Rules of Practice, 1993, and as per Section 14(c) of the Act of 1985, the jurisdiction to decide the dispute of grant of family pension to the petitioner from Railway Department is with the Central Administrative Tribunal, having territorial jurisdiction to decide the same. 7. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of reserving the liberty in favour of the petitioner to approach the jurisdictional Central Administrative Tribunal for redressal of her grievances. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge inder