The Supreme Court ruled that temporary railway employees completing over one year of continuous service are entitled to family pension under Rule 75 of the Railway Pension Rules, 1993, regardless of regularization. The Court emphasized that legislative intent protects dependents of deceased employees, rejecting the 10-year threshold argument and directing arrears payment with ₹5 lakh ex-gratia relief under Article 142.
Facts Of The Case:
The case involves Mala Devi, widow of Om Prakash Maharaj, a temporary railway employee who died in service after 9 years and 8 months of continuous work. Appointed as a “Summer Waterman” in 1986, he later cleared screening tests and was deputed as a Guard/Shuntman before his fatal accident in 1996. While Mala Devi received ex-gratia payment and compassionate employment as a Substitute Gangman, her claim for family pension was denied by authorities citing her husband’s non-regularized status and failure to complete the purported 10-year service requirement. The Central Administrative Tribunal (2015) and Patna High Court (2016) upheld this denial, relying on precedents that restricted pension benefits to regularized employees. The Supreme Court, however, examined Rule 1515 of the Indian Railway Establishment Manual and Rule 75 of the Railway Pension Rules, 1993, which entitle substitutes to temporary employee benefits after four months of continuous service. Noting the deceased had cleared medical and screening formalities and served for nearly a decade, the Court held the family pension could not be denied merely due to technical shortfall in service duration or non-regularization. It ordered arrears payment and awarded ₹5 lakh ex-gratia under Article 142, emphasizing the welfare intent of pension rules for dependents of deceased employees.
Procedural History:
The case originated with Mala Devi’s application (O.A. No. 050/00276/2014) before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna, seeking family pension after her husband’s death during service. The Tribunal dismissed her claim on 23.12.2015, holding that non-regularization of her husband’s employment disentitled her to pension benefits. This was affirmed by the Patna High Court on 12.05.2016 in W.P.(C) No. 8524/2016, which cited the 10-year service threshold requirement. The Supreme Court, in Civil Appeal No. 10672/2016, reversed these decisions on 16.07.2025, interpreting Rule 75 of the Railway Pension Rules 1993 to hold that temporary employees completing one year of continuous service qualify for family pension. The Court directed payment of arrears within four months and awarded ₹5 lakh ex-gratia under Article 142, concluding the 29-year legal battle
READ ALSO :Supreme Court How Contradictory Witness Testimonies Saved a Man from the Death Penalty
Court Observation:
The Supreme Court made significant observations while allowing the appeal, emphasizing the welfare-centric interpretation of pension rules. The Bench noted that Rule 75 of the Railway Pension Rules, 1993 expressly entitles temporary employees’ families to pension benefits after just one year of continuous service, irrespective of regularization status. The Court rejected the mechanical application of the 10-year threshold, observing that such rigid interpretation would defeat the social security purpose of pension schemes. It highlighted that the deceased employee had not only completed nearly a decade of service but had also cleared all screening tests for regularization, making the denial of benefits “manifestly arbitrary”. The judgment underscored that administrative technicalities cannot override substantive rights of dependents, especially when the employee died in harness. Significantly, the Court invoked Article 142 to grant ₹5 lakh ex-gratia, observing that the widow’s 29-year legal battle exemplified systemic delays in justice delivery to marginalized claimants. The ruling clarified that substitutes acquiring temporary status under Rule 1515 of the Railway Manual must be treated at par with regular employees for pensionary benefits.
Final Decision & Judgement:
In its landmark judgment dated July 16, 2025, the Supreme Court of India allowed Mala Devi’s civil appeal (No. 10672/2016), setting aside the orders of the Patna High Court and Central Administrative Tribunal. The Court held that the Appellant was entitled to family pension under Rule 75 of the Railway Pension Rules, 1993, as her husband had completed over one year of continuous service as a temporary railway employee, notwithstanding his non-regularized status. The Bench rejected the Respondents’ argument about the 10-year service requirement, terming it “contrary to the protective intent of pension laws.”The Court issued three specific directives: (1) Payment of full arrears of family pension within four months; (2) Continuing monthly pension as per rules; and (3) An ex-gratia compensation of ₹5 lakh under Article 142 of the Constitution, acknowledging the widow’s three-decade-long struggle for justice. The judgment emphasized that pension rights cannot be denied on “hyper-technical grounds” when the employee had dedicated nearly 10 years to railway service before his untimely death.
Case Details:
Case Title:Mala Devi vs. Union of India & Ors. Citation:2025 INSC 855 Civil Appeal No.:Civil Appeal No. 10672 of 2016 Date of Judgment:July 16, 2025 Judges/Justice Name: Justice Satish Chandra Sharma & Justice Sanjay Karol
Download The Judgement Here