SMT. SITA BAYI vs THROUGH GENERAL MANAGER SOUTH CENTRAL RAILWAY SECUNDERABAD

1 | P a g e BEFORE THE RALWAY CLAIMS TRIBUNAL (BENGALURU BENCH AT BENGALURU) CLAIM APPLICATION No.OA (II U)/SBC/0055/2022 DATED THIS WEDNESDAY THE 28TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2024 CORAM: 1.

Mrs.

IVY CHARLES D’CRUZ, Hon’ble Member (Judicial).

2.

Mr.

RAVI NANDKEOLYAR, Hon’ble Member (Technical).

BETWEEN 1.

Smt.

Sitabayi W/o. late Narayan Pawar, Age about 65 Yrs., Occ: Household R/o.

Venkatesh Nagar, Kurkunta Tq., Sedam Dist., Kalaburagi.

Lalita @ Lalitabai W/o.

Narayan Rathod, (D/o. late Narayan Pawar), Age about 48 Yrs., Occ: Household R/o.

C/o.

Rajashree Cement Works, Aditya Nagar, Malkhed Tq: Sedam, Dist: Kalaburagi.

3.

Sri Vishwanath Pawar S/o. late Narayan Pawar, Age about 45 Yrs., Occ: Service, R/o.

Venkatesh Nagar, Kurukunta, Tq: Sedam, Dist:Kalaburagi.

4.

Sushilabai W/o.

Shivasharnappa Rathod, (D/o. late Narayan Pawar), Age about 44 Yrs., Occ: Household R/o.

Nandikoor Tanda, Near Central Jail, Kalaburagi.

5.

Sri Tulsiram S/o. late Narayan Pawar, Age about 43 Yrs., Occ: Service, R/o.

6.

Sri Ramnath Pawar S/o. late Narayan Pawar, Age about 41 Yrs., Occ: Labour, R/o.

7.

Sri.

Rupanaik S/o. late Narayan Pawar, Age about 39 Yrs., Occ: Private Service, R/o.

Venkatesh Nagar, Kurkunta, Tq: Sedam, Dist:Kalaburagi.

8.

Anil Kumar S/o.

Narayan, Age about 34 Yrs., Occ: Service, R/o.

Venkatesh Nagar, Kurkunta, Tq: Sedam, Dist:Kalaburagi. :: Applicants 2 | P a g e A N D Union of India Represented by The General Manager, South Central Railway, Rail Nilayam, SECUNDERABAD. :: Respondent Application under Section 16 of Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 read with Section 123(c) (2) and 124-A of Railways Act, 1989.

Value of Claim for Rs.15,00,000/-.

Ld., Counsel appeared: Shri Sharanayya P.

Puranik, For Applicants.

Shri Satish.

B, For Respondent.

J U D G M E N T IVY CHARLES D’CRUZ, MEMBER (JUDICIAL).

1.

ICIAL).

Basic Details relating to accident as contained in the Application:- a.

Name of the deceased: Shri Narayan Pawar S/o.

Anbru Age & Profession 73 Years, Retired as Loco Operator Now working as a coolie b.

Date of accident : 26.02.2020 c.

Relationship of the claimants with the deceased : Wife, Five Sons and Two married Daughters. d.

Train involved and transit details: Yeswantpur-Bidar Express Train e.

Untoward incident narrated : It is alleged in the claim application of the applicants that Shri Narayan Pawar (hereinafter called and referred to as ‘deceased’ for brevity) was a resident on Kurkunta of Sedam Taluk and coolie by profession.

On 26.02.2020, the deceased along with his son Vishwanath and grand daughter, Sarita while travelling as a bonafide passenger holding a valid second class journey ticket bearing No.UPE-28034275 were travelling from Malkhed Road to Hyderabad.

During the course of journey, the deceased went to toilet to attend natures’ call, but did not return.

Deceased’s son searched for his father, but not found in the coach.

When the train was in operation near Kurkunta Railway Station, at RKM No.45/0, he accidentally fell down from the moving train, sustained fatal injuries and died on the spot.

3 | P a g e 2.

The Keyman, Shri Lingaiah, noticed that a male dead body aged about 60 years was found lying on the Down main line at RKM No.45/0.

Based on the same, Deputy Station Master, Kurkunta Railway Station, issued a Memo dated 26.02.2020 at 7.30 hrs.

Based on the same, FIR No.0020 OF 2020 dated 26.02.2020 at 8.30 AM was registered by Shri Shivakumar, Head Constable under Section 174 Cr.P.C (Exh A-2).

Inquest report (Exh A-3) was commenced at 10.00 hrs., and concluded at 11.30 hrs., on 26.02.2020, which in specific noticed at more than one place about the details of above rail ticket, and various injuries suffered by the deceased.

Post-mortem (Exh A-4) was held on 26.02. on 26.02.2020 and cause of death was opined as “Hypovolemic shock as a result of crush injury due to railway accident.” After due investigation, the Police Sub-Inspector has prepared a ‘Final Report’ and submitted before Taluka Executive Magistrate Court, Sedam and concluded the case ‘Accidental Death’.

Copy of the ticket was produced along with OA as Exh A-5.

Applicant No.5, Shri Tulsiram S/o. late Narayan Pawar, Son of the deceased filed his affidavit dated 29.04.2023 and prayed that thirty four documents annexed to the OA be exhibited as A-1 to A-34.

He was examined and cross-examined on 07.06.2023.

Downloaded copy of Genealogical Tree issued by Deputy Tahsildar, Sedam (Exh A-33), Aadhaar Cards of all the Applicants filed and were marked as (Exh.

A-9 to A-16).

He also prayed that averments made in the affidavit be read as his deposition.

The complete text of AW-1’s deposition in verbatim form are made as under:- “My name is Tulsiram Pawar.

In Aadhar card Tulsiram is reflected.

My father name was Narayan Pawar.

Totally he has seven children i.e., five male children and two female children.

All seven members are parties in this claim application.

In my Aadhar card my father’s name is shown as Narayan Pawar.

In Applicant No.1 Aadhar card wife of Narayan Powar is reflected.

The incident took place on 26.02.2020 while my father was travelling to Hyderabad he died in Malkhed road Railway station.

My deceased father fallen down from moving train.

I am not the eye witness to the incident.

He was travelling along with Vishwanath my elder brother and shwetha.

Vishwanth age is about 47 years and grand daughter Shwetha age is about 06 years old.

At the time of death of my father Vishwanth and Shwetha have accompanied my deceased father.

Police have recorded my statement.

In the police statement he stated that Vishwanath came in another train to the incident spot.

I am aware of the contents of the affidavit filed before this Tribunal.

Tribunal.

We call her as Shwetha but in Aadhar card her name is Sarita.

Key man at the spot informed about the death of my father to us.

We have hotel near our house it is about 200 mtrs from Railway gate. keyman regularly comes to my hotel to have tea.

My younger brother is running the hotel.

Keyman is familiar to my father that’s why he recognized as my father.

Residence is close to the Railway gate.

I was present at the time of conducting police inquest report.

Except shirt and pant no other articles were found on the spot.

Ticket was available with my elder brother.

I deny the suggestion 4 | P a g e that my deceased father did not travel by any train.

I have not seen him purchased the ticket.

Ticket was from Malkhed road to Hyderabad.

Malkhed station is about 24 kilometres from our residence.

There is Kurkunta Railway station which is about 200 metres and Railway gate is near to my house.

Since the train was superfast there is no stoppage hence my deceased father had gone go to Malkhed road Railway station.

There is no eye witness to the incident.

I have produced family tree before this Tribunal.

I deny the suggestion that the injuries were not caused due to fall from the train.

I deny the suggestion that the injuries caused due to some personal conflict but not due to fall from train.

I deny the suggestion that there was no jerk and jolt to the said train.

I deny the suggestion that the cause of death was not due to fall from train.

I deny the suggestion that the ticket was planted one and I am deposing falsely.” (emphasis supplied) 4.

In the reply filed, respondent has denied the averments made in the OA.

It was stated that the incident in question did not fall within the ambit of Section 124-A of Railways Act, 1989.

Respondent also submitted that there is no eye witness to the alleged incident and no documents or evidence to prove that the deceased had travelled and fallen down from train. rom train.

The averments made in Para-(ii) that the deceased was travelling along with his son and grand daughter were also not aware of the incident and they did not inform to any Railway officials about the incident.

Respondent also contended that during preparation of Joint Observation Report, no journey ticket was found with the deceased.

Therefore, it is responsibility of the applicant to prove that the deceased was a bonafide passenger.

By filing DRM report, it was concluded that: “From the above discussion, it is clear that there is no eye witness to the incident.

Guard of train No.16571 Express claimed that he did not notice any untoward incident and there was no detention of train.

No jerks/jolts experienced by him during its run.

JE/P.

Way/Sedam also certified that the track was fit for smooth running of trains between Chittapur-Nawandgi Railway stations.

No ticket found at the time of preparing Joint Observation Report.

The journey ticket was submitted by son of the deceased after conducting of Panchanamma by GRP/WD.

In view of the above facts, the death of the deceased appears to be suspicious in nature.

There is no fault on the part of Railways in the subject incident. (emphasis supplied) In the above backdrop, it was contended by Respondent of Central Railway that applicants are not eligible for compensation, as prayed for.

Along with Statutory DRM’s Report, Respondent Railways enclosed Form – 1 Report of Untoward Incident containing Brief Particulars of Untoward Incident, copy of journey ticket, FIR, Police Inquest Report, Post- mortem Certificate, Statements submitted by police.

Bare perusal of above DRM’s Report would reveal that during the Joint Observation Report, the 5 | P a g e police have not recovered any journey ticket.

Non-recovery of journey ticket during the Joint Observation Report, in our considered opinion, clinch the entire issue raised in present OA.

Based on pleadings raised; the issues were framed vide order dated 17.03. ted 17.03.2023, to the following effect: 1.

Whether the deceased was a bonafide passenger?

Whether there was any untoward incident as is defined under the provisions of Section 123© of Railways Act, 1989?

Whether the applicants are dependents of the deceased?

Whether the applicants are entitled for any relief and interest as prayed for in the application?

We have heard both sides at length, perused the pleadings and other material placed on record very carefully.

ISSUE No.1 8.

At the outset, we may note that Applicant No.5, Shri Tulsiram S/o.

Narayan Pawar Son of the deceased who has deposed as AW-1 on 03.05.2023.

The complete text of his deposition in verbatim form made read as under: 9.

Ld., Counsel for the Applicants submitted that the Applicants have filed the certified copy of computerized journey ticket bearing No.UPE- 28034275 dated 26.02.2020 for two adults and one child for the travel between Malkhed Road to Hyderabad, on the strength of which the deceased was travelling and also filed an affidavit in support of the same.

However, Ld.

Counsel for Respondent contested the authenticity of the ticket claiming that it was not recovered from the possession of the deceased during his personal search, its recovery is not mentioned in the ‘Joint Observation Report’ and it is a subsequent inclusion.

The said observation in the Statutory DRM’s Report, Exh R-1 is patently incorrect, since a certified copy of the journey ticket bearing No.UPE-28034275 is produced by the applicants which shows that it was valid for journey of two adults and one child passengers from Malkhed Road to Hyderabad.

10.

Further, at Para-11 and 17 of the Inquest Report Exh A-3 also it is mentioned that all the three of them purchased journey ticket and boarded Train No.16571 – Yeshwantpur-Bidar Express and were traveling from Malkhed Road to Hyderabad.

The name of AW-1 as co-passenger and eye 6 | P a g e witness to the occurrence is mentioned in the inquest report, Exh A-3 also.

A-3 also.

In the application also the names of the co-passengers are mentioned.

It cannot therefore be said that co-passengers are pressed into service for the purpose of this case or that journey ticket is procured for the purpose of the claim application.

With the examination of AW-1 coupled with copy of journey ticket produced by the applicants and other evidence available on record the initial onus lying on the applicants to show that the deceased was a passenger stands discharged.

There is no contra evidence on the respondent side in discharge of the burden cast on them to show that the deceased was not a bonafide passenger.

In these circumstances, it is held that the deceased was a bonafide passenger on board Train No.16571 – Yeshwantpur-Bidar Express and were traveling from Malkhed Road to Hyderabad 26/27.02.2020.

The issue is answered accordingly in favour of the applicants.

ISSUE No.2 11.

As far as Issue No.2 is concerned, the report of ‘untoward incident’.

As stated supra, in the instant case, law was set into motion based on the Keyman, Shri Lingaiah, who noticed that a male dead body aged about 60 years was found lying on the Down main line at RKM No.45/0.

Based on the same, FIR No.0020 OF 2020 dated 26.02.202 at 8.30 AM was registered by Shri Shivakumar, Head Constable under Section 174 Cr.P.C (Exh A-2).

Post-mortem (Exh A-4) was held on 26.02.2020 and cause of death was opined as “Hypovolemic shock as a result of crush injury due to railway accident. accident.” After due investigation, the Police Sub-Inspector has prepared a ‘Final Report’ and submitted before Taluka Executive Magistrate Court, Sedam and concluded the case ‘Accidental Death’.

Merely because, there has been no eye witness to his fall from running train; cannot be justified and sufficient to hold that the death of the deceased was not an accidental fall from the train and does not comes under the purview of Section 123© or Section 124-A of the Railways Act, 1989.

There is no Rule or law which suggests to the effect that in all Railway accident there should have witness, which is a pre-requisite condition for grant of compensation.

Hence, all these aspects of Respondent 7 | P a g e has no justification.

Even if it is accepted and presumed that there was no witness, factum of deceased fall and various injuries suffered, as highlighted in the post-mortem report as well as DRM’s report, cannot nullify the suggestion made belatedly while filing DRM’s Report.

12.

Respondent did not lead any evidence to prove that the act of the deceased leading to his death was as a result of any of the followings, covered under exceptional clause in section 124A of Railways Act, 1989: a) Suicide or attempted suicide by him; b) Self-inflicted injury; c) His own criminal act; d) Any act committed by him in a state of intoxication or insanity; e) Any natural cause or disease or medical or surgical treatment unless such treatment becomes necessary due to injury caused by the said untoward incident.

13.

It is settled proposition that provisions of Section 124-A are based on the principle of strict liability or no fault liability and it is mandated that subject to certain exceptional circumstances, Railway Administration is bound to pay the compensation regardless of any wrongful act, negligence or default on the part of the Railway Administration. istration.

The Railways can escape the liability to pay the compensation only when the said injury comes within the exception clauses (a) to (e) of the proviso to Section 124-A of the Act.

However, in this case Respondent failed to produce any such evidence.

14.

We are unable to find a justification and substance in averments made by the respondent that he did not travel and applicants have preferred a false claim.

In given circumstances, there is no other possibility, but to hold that the deceased was a bonafide passenger, who travelled and had a fall from running train at the spot where his body was found.

Applicants being Wife, Sons and Daughters are entitled to prescribed compensation being legal heirs/dependents of deceased.

In such circumstances, Issue No.2 is answered and held to be proved.

8 | P a g e ISSUE No.3 15.

The applicants in their claim application have stated that Applicant No.1, Smt.

Sitabayi W/o. late Narayan Pawar, Wife of the deceased.

Applicant No.2, Smt.

Narayan Rathod & D/o. late Narayan Pawar, Married daughter of the deceased.

Applicant No.

3, Shri Vishwanath Pawar S/o. late Narayan Pawar, Son of the deceased.

Applicant No.4, Smt.

Shivasharnappa Rathod & D/o. late Narayan Pawar, Married Daughter of the deceased.

Applicant No.5, Smt.

Tulsiram S/o. late Narayan Pawar.

Applicant No.6, Sri Ramnath Pawar S/o. late Narayan Pawar.

Applicant No.7, Sri.

Rupanaik S/o.

Narayan Pawar and Applicant No.8.

Shri Anil Kumar S/o.

Narayan are the sons of the deceased.

In order to prove their legal heirs/dependency with the deceased, applicants have filed Downloaded copy of Genealogical Tree issued by Deputy Tahsildar, Sedam (Exh A-33), photostat copies of Aadhaar Cards and PAN Cards of all the Applicants filed and were marked as (Exh.

A-9 to A-16 and A-25 to A-32 respectively.

In absence of any contest from Ld. t from Ld.

Counsel for the Respondent on this issue and there being no evidence to the contrary, the aforesaid eight Applicants, being the Wife, Five sons and two married daughters of the deceased are the dependents of the deceased, as per Section 123(b)(i) of the Railways Act, 1989.

Issue No.3 is decided accordingly in favour of the applicants.

ISSUE No.4 16.

As per GSR 1165(E) issued by the Ministry of Railways on 22.12.2016, the amount of compensation payable in cases of death due to untoward incidents is Rs.8 Lakh.

17.

Hence, the present Claim Application is allowed, the Respondent are directed to pay a sum of Rs.8,00,000/- to the applicants as compensation for the death of the deceased in an untoward incident.

Applicants are entitled for interest at the rate of 6% from the date of registration of present OA i.e., 22.11.2022 till the date of award.

The Respondent shall deposit the amount as per award with Additional Registrar/RCT, Bangalore within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order.

In case of default in payment within the stipulated period, the Respondent shall be liable to pay simple interest @ 6% per annum for subsequent delay.

9 | P a g e O R D E R 1.

The claim application is ‘ALLOWED’ to the extent of payment of Rs.8,00,000/- (Rupees Eight Lakh) plus pro rata interest @ 6% per annum from the date of registration of the present OA i.e., 22.11.2022 till the date of award to the aforesaid dependents of the deceased as compensation.

In order to protect claimants from exploitation, GSR No. n, GSR No.347 dated 3rd June 2020, has been issued by this Ministry of Railways which has come into effect on 1st day of January, 2020 incorporating it in the Railway Accidents & Untoward Incident (Compensation) Rules, 1990. “5.

Mode of Payment: 5.1.

The Tribunal may in order to protect the sum awarded to the claimant, having due regard to the illiteracy or other disabling factors impairing the judicious use of such sum, issue directions for disbursing the award in terms of annuities, fixed deposits or other suitable mode as shall sub-serve justice.

5.2.

If any of the claimants is a minor or person of unsound mind, the Tribunal may give liberty to the guardian ad litem to use the interest accruals on the deposit that shall be made during the minority for maintenances.

5.3.

Nothing in this Rule shall limit the power of the Tribunal to make modifications of the mode of disbursal for reasons to be stated in writing depending on the exigencies requiring liquidation of any corpus created for annuity or premature closure of fixed deposit, for the benefit of the claimant.” 5.4 The orders dated 21st April, 2017, 24th May, 2019 and 6th November, 2019 of Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in FAO No.22/2015 and CM Application No.4501/2015 in Geeta Devi Vs.

Union of India, relating to disbursement of compensation shall be read as part of this Rule.” 5.4.1 Examination of the Claimant(s) before passing of the award – (i) RCT shall; before or at the time of passing of the award, examine the claimant(s) to ascertain their financial condition/needs, mode of disbursement of and amount to be kept in fixed deposit.

10 | P a g e (ii) Before disbursement of the award amount, the RCT shall direct the claimant(s) to open an individual savings bank account in a nationalized bank near the place of their permanent residence and the concerned bank be directed to not issue any cheque book(s) and/or debit card(s) to the claimant(s) and if the same have already been issued, the bank be directed to cance d to cancel the same and make an endorsement on the passbook of the claimant(s) to the effect that no cheque book and/or debit card shall be issued to the claimant(s) without the permission of the RCT.

The concerned Bank of the claimant(s) be directed to permit the claimant(s) to withdraw money from his savings bank account by means of a withdrawal form only.

The claimant(s) be directed to produce the copy of the order passed by the RCT before the concerned bank whereupon the bank be directed to make an endorsement on the passbook.

The claimant(s) be directed to produce the passbook with the necessary endorsement as well as Aadhaar Card and PAN Card before the RCT on the next date fixed for compliance. (iii) RCT shall take the following documents on record from the claimant(s):- (a) Details of the Bank Accounts of the Claimant(s) near the place of their residence with necessary endorsement. (b) Aadhaar Card, PAN Card or any other appropriate ID card; and (c) Two sets of photographs and specimen signatures of the Claimant(s).

5.4.4 RCT shall impose the following conditions with respect to the fixed deposits – (a) The Bank shall not permit any joint name(s) to be added in the savings bank account or fixed deposit accounts of the Claimant(s), i.e., the savings bank account(s) of the Claimant(s) shall be an individual savings bank account(s) and not a joint account(s). (b) The original fixed deposit shall be retained by the bank in safe custody.

However, the statement containing FDR number, FDR amount, date of maturity and maturity amount shall be furnished by bank to the Claimant(s). (c) The monthly interest be created by Electronic Clearing System (ECS) in the savings bank account of the Claimant(s) near the place of their residence. (d) The maturity amounts of the FDR(s) be credited by Electronic Clearing System (ECS) in the savings bank account of the Claimant(s) near the place of their residence. residence. (e) No loan, advance, withdrawal or pre-mature discharge be allowed on the fixed deposits without permission of the RCT. (f) The concerned Bank shall not issue any cheque book and/or debit card to the Claimant(s).

However, in case the debit card and/or cheque book have already been issued, Bank shall cancel the same before the disbursement of the award amount.

The Bank shall freeze the Account of the Claimant(s) so that no debit card be issued in respect of the account of the Claimant(s) from any other Branch of the Bank. (g) The Bank shall make an endorsement on the passbook of the Claimant(s) to the effect that no cheque book and/or debit card 11 | P a g e have been issued and shall not be issued without the permission of the RCT and Claimant(s) shall produce the passbook with the necessary endorsement before the RCT on the next date of fixed for compliance. (h) It is clarified that the endorsement made by the bank along with the duly signed and stamped by the bank official on the passbook(s) of the Claimant(s) is sufficient compliance of clause(g) above. (i) The concerned Bank of the Claimant(s) be directed to permit the claimant to withdraw money from his savings bank account by means of a withdrawal form only.

In pursuance of Rule 5 quoted above, in the present case, the amount of award along with interest shall be disbursed in the following manner:- 3.

Out of the total share of compensation awarded, 10% of the share of compensation amount along with its proportionate interest of Applicant No.1, Smt.

Sitabayi W/o. late Narayan Pawar, Wife of the deceased, shall entitled to receive a share of Rs.4,50,000/- (Rupees Four Lakh and Fifty Thousand) along with pro rata interest, Applicant No.2, Smt.

Narayan Rathod & D/o. late Narayan Pawar, Married daughter of the deceased, Applicant No.

3, Shri Vishwanath Pawar S/o. late Narayan Pawar, Son of the deceased, Applicant No.4, Smt.

Shivasharnappa Rathod & D/o. hod & D/o. late Narayan Pawar, Married Daughter of the deceased, Applicant No.5, Smt.

Tulsiram S/o. late Narayan Pawar, Applicant No.6, Sri Ramnath Pawar S/o. late Narayan Pawar, Applicant No.7, Sri.

Narayan Pawar and Applicant No.8, Shri Anil Kumar S/o.

Narayan, shall entitled to receive a share of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) along with pro rata interest to be released forthwith by ECS/NEFT transfer to their savings bank account by Additional Registrar, Bengaluru Bench, Bengaluru upon deposit of amount by the Respondent upon issuance of appropriate orders to this effect.

Out of the total share of compensation awarded, 10% of the share of compensation amount along with its proportionate interest of all the Applicants i.e., Wife, Five Sons and Two Daughters of the deceased, shall be released forthwith by ECS/NEFT transfer to their savings bank account by Additional Registrar, Bengaluru Bench, Bengaluru upon deposit of amount by the Respondent upon issuance of appropriate orders to this effect.

It is also directed that, rest of the share together with accrued interest, if any, of all the Applicants shall be invested in a Fixed Term Deposit for a period of 12 | P a g e three years in a nationalized bank, near to the place of their place of residence with monthly payment of accrued interest to them.

Bank authorities are at liberty to release the Fixed Terms Deposit of the respective claimants after its maturity without making any reference to this Tribunal.

Additional Registrar, Bengaluru Bench, Bengaluru upon deposit of total compensation amount, the same shall be released forthwith by ECS/NEFT transfer to the bank account of the claimants.

In facts and circumstances of the case, there is however, no order as to costs.

Registry is directed to send a free certified copy of this Order to the parties in view of Rule 34(3) of the Railway Claims Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1989.

9. , 1989.

9.

With these observation, the application is ‘ALLOWED’ and disposed off accordingly.

File be consigned to Record Room after compliance. (IVY CHARLES D’CRUZ) (RAVI NANDKEOLYAR) MEMBER (JUDICIAL) MEMBER (TECHNICAL) Judgment pronounced on Wednesday, the 28th Day of August, 2024. (IVY CHARLES D’CRUZ) (RAVI NANDKEOLYAR) MEMBER (JUDICIAL) MEMBER (TECHNICAL) L.

SURESH, PS Gr-II, RCT/BNC