HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 9113 of 2026 Court No. - 5 HON'BLE PRAKASH PADIA, J. HON'BLE VIVEK SARAN, J. 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to implead Regional Accounts Officer, Northern Railway, New Delhi, as respondent no.5 in the array of the respondents, during course of the day. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Perused the record. 3. The instant petition although has been filed with the relief that the amount which was in the bank account of the mother of the petitioner, Late Kamla Devi be reverted back and paid to the petitioner. The case of the petitioner is that her mother was receiving pension, which was being regularly credited to her bank account bearing No. 30051220 maintained with the Union Bank of India. An amount of Rs.5,36,092/- had accumulated in the said account. However, the Bank, arbitrarily and without issuing any prior notice to the petitioner, reverted the said amount to the concerned authorities. 4. Aggrieved by the said decision, petitioner earlier approached this Court by means of Writ C No.19403 of 2025 (Kiran Rathi vs. Branch Manager through Union Bank of India) which was disposed of vide order dated 10.06.2025 directing the Bank to decide the representation of the petitioner. Pursuant to the said order of this Court, the representation of the petitioner has been decided vide order dated 01.07.2025, copy of which has been annexed as Annexure No.8 to the writ petition. The perusal of the said order reveals that the same only recites that the said reversion of the amount has been denied pursuant to some finding of a report from the Railway Department. It however, recites no other reasons. It is thus clear that the said reversion is at the instance of the railway authority. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Mohd Aamir Counsel for Respondent(s) : A.S.G.I., Ashish Agrawal, Sudarshan Singh Kiran Rathi .....Petitioner(s) Union Of India And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) 5. Thus evidently the case of the petitioner has not been addressed on its merits. This Court finds that the amount lying in the bank account of the deceased, Late Kamla Devi, was reverted back. The reason assigned for such reversion is contained in Clause 5 of the correspondence dated 25.04.2023 addressed by the Railway authorities to the Bank, wherein it has been stated that the pensioner had not submitted any proof of her being alive. This, apparently, means that the pensioner had not submitted the requisite 'life certificate' to the concerned authorities. The second reason is that there has been no withdrawal from the account since 09.05.2018. Both the reasons may be relevant for non-grant of any pension but in case a reasonable opportunity ought to have been granted to the petitioner being the claimant/heir of Late Kamla Devi. 6. It is the admitted case of the petitioner that Late Kamla Devi died on 11.06.2019 and she was receiving family pension on account of her deceased husband Late Ram Singh who held a pensionable post with the railway authorities. Thus, in any case the entitlement of Late Kamla Devi to receive pension was until her date of date of death i.e. 11.06.2019 and this aspect has not been addressed or looked upon by the authorities that is the railway department prior to issuance of communication dated 25.04.2023 to the Bank which has resulted in reversion of the amount which was existing in the bank account of Late Kamla Devi. 7. Thus, it would be in the fitness of things that the petitioner be granted liberty to represent before the newly impleaded respondent no.5 by submitting an apprehensive representation including all documents which would be relevant both for the purpose of entitlement of the petitioner to claim the pension amount of her deceased mother and also the entitlement of the deceased mother to receive the pension. 8. In view of the aforesaid discussion, without entering into the merits of the case, this petition stands disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to make a fresh representation before newly impleaded respondent no.5, Regional Accounts Officer, Northern Railway, New Delhi within a period of two months from the date of presentation of certified copy of this order. It is expected from the respondent no.5 to decide the same within a reasonable period of time preferably within six months. September 15, 2026 Deepika WRIC No. 9113 of 2026 2 (Vivek Saran,J.) (Prakash Padia,J.) Digitally signed by :- DEEPIKA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad