ISUKAPALLI JAYA PRAKASH (M) , vs SOUTH CENTRAL RAILWAY (M) ,

OA/605/2021 Page 1 of 3 CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH, HYDERABAD OA/021/605/2021 HYDERABAD, this the 15th day of September, 2021 Hon’ble Mr.

Ashish Kalia, Judl.

Member Hon’ble Mr.

B V Sudhakar, Admn.

Member Isukapalli Jaya Prakash, S/o Isukapalli Subba Rao, Retired Gang Mate/SC Rly/Tenali, Aged 45 years, Door No.

12-198/3, Christian Pet, Tadepalli Mandal, Guntur District, A.P. ...Applicant. (By Advocate : Mr.

B Rajesh Kumar) Vs.

1.

Union of India, Ministry of Railways, Represented by the General Manager, South Central Railway, Secunderabad-T.S.

2.

The Divisional Railway Manager, South Central Railway, Vijayawada- A.P.

3.

The Sr.

Divisional Personnel Officer, South Central Railway, Vijayawada Division- A.P. ...

Respondents. (By Advocate: Mrs.

Vijaya Sagi, SC for Railways) --- OA/605/2021 Page 2 of 3 ORAL ORDER (As per Hon’ble Mr.

Member) Through Video Conferencing: Heard Mr.

B Rajesh Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant and Mrs.

Vijaya Sagi, learned counsel for the respondents.

The brief facts of the case are that the applicant was a dependent disabled son to the deceased railway servant.

The applicant’s father retired on 31.10.1996 and had passed away on 04.08.2003.

Later on, the applicant’s mother passed away on 15.08.2003 and he is seeking secondary family pension.

The respondents have denied the secondary family pension to the applicant on the ground of no authenticated documentary evidence regarding his date of birth.

The applicant’s father declared him as his disabled dependent son and he is unmarried due to his disability.

The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has made a representation dt.

26.03.2021 to the respondents to consider him for secondary family pension but there is no response from them.

Being aggrieved of this, the applicant has approached this Tribunal for redressal of his grievance.

4.

Mrs.

Vijaya Sagi, learned counsel, accepted notice on behalf of the respondents.

5. ndents.

5.

After hearing learned counsels for the parties at length, we are of this view that this matter can be decided at the admission stage itself with a direction to the respondents to dispose of the representation of the applicant dt.

26.03.2021 by a reasoned and speaking order within a period of eight weeks from the date of OA/605/2021 Page 3 of 3 receipt of certified copy of this order and communicate the same to the applicant in a time-bound manner.

In case, the applicant is not satisfied with the order to be passed by the respondents, he is at liberty to re-approach this Tribunal.

It is ordered accordingly.

6.

With the above observation, the OA is disposed of at admission stage itself.

7.

It is also made clear that we have not gone into the merits of the case. (B.V.

SUDHAKAR) (ASHISH KALIA) ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER /Ram/