Bombay High Court
ASHOK TOTARAM MARSALEversusUNION OF INDIA THR ITS MINISTRY OF RAILWAY AND ORS
- Decided
- Disposal
- Rejected
Holding
The petitioner is not eligible for family pension under Rule 75(6) and the petition is dismissed.
Summary
The petitioner, Ashok Totaram Marsale, filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking quashing of orders that denied him family pension and directing the respondents to pay pension per the Railway Pension Manual, 1993. The respondents contended that the petition was not maintainable and that the petitioner was ineligible for pension under Rule 75(6) of the Railway Services (Pension) Rules, 1993 because he was married and a medical board had certified that he could earn his livelihood. The court examined the petitioner’s marital status, age, and the medical board’s certificate, finding that the conditions for family pension – specifically the prohibition for married persons and the ability to earn a livelihood – were not satisfied. Consequently, the court held that the petitioner was not entitled to family pension. The petition was dismissed without costs.
Issues considered
- The petition’s maintainability under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
- Whether the petitioner is eligible for family pension under Rule 75(6) of the Railway Services (Pension) Rules, 1993.
- Interpretation of the disability provisions and the requirement of a medical board certificate.
Legislation cited
- Constitution of India — s. Art. 226
- Railway Services (Pension) Rules, 1993 — s. Rule 75(6)
Subjects
- Family pension
- Railway pension
- Article 226
- Eligibility
- Marital status
- Disability
Judgment
6.DOC
Digitally
signed by
PRASHANT
PRASHANT VILAS
VILAS RANE
RANE Date:
2026.08.04
09:59:25
+0530
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 6846 of 2025
Ashok Totaram Marsale. ...Petitioner
Vs.
Union of India & Ors. ...Respondents
_________
Mr. Rahul R. Patil (through V.C.), for the Petitioner.
Mrs. Anjali N. Helekar with Ms. Anu C. Kaladharan, for Respondents..
__________
CORAM: G. S. KULKARNI &
AARTI SATHE, JJ.
DATE: 27 JULY 2026.
P.C.
1. We have heard learned Counsel for the parties.
2. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed
praying for the following substantive reliefs:-
“a) that this Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of certiorari or a
writ in the nature of certiorari or any other writ, order or direction,
calling for the papers and proceedings of the petitioners case and after
considering the correctness and veracity of the impugned orders dated
13th January 2020 (Exhibit ‘I’) and 14th August 2020 (Exhibit ‘Q’), this
Hon’ble Court be pleased to quash and set aside the impugned orders
dated 13th January 2020 (Exhibit ‘I’) and 14 th August 2020 (Exhibit
‘Q’);
b) that this Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a
writ in the nature of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction,
ordering and directing the Respondents to make payment of pension to
the petitioner as per the recommendations made by the Senior
Divisional Medical Officer, Central Railway, Bhusawal vide his letter
dated 29th May 2020 (Exhibit ‘L’) and in accordance with the Railway
Pension Manual, 1993;”
3. A reply affidavit on behalf of the respondents is placed on record to
contend that the petition is not maintainable in view of availability of an
efficacious alternative remedy. It is also contended that the petitioner is not
Page 1 of 4
27 July 2026
P. V. Rane
6.DOC
eligible for family pension under Rule 75(6) of the Railway Services (Pension)
Rules 1993 (for short ‘Rules’). Rule 75 of the Rules provides for Family Pension
Scheme for Railway Servants, 1964. The Rule 75(6) as quoted by the petitioner is
required to be noted which read thus:
"75. Family Pension Scheme for railway servants, 1964: -
(1) The provisions of this rule shall apply: -
.. .. … .. … .. ..
(6) The period for which family pension is payable shall be as follows:--
(i) subject to first proviso, in the case of a widow or widower, up to the date of
death or remarriage, whichever is earlier;
(ii) subject to second proviso, in the case of an unmarried son, until he attains the
age of twenty-five years or until he gets married or until he starts earning his
livelihood, whichever is the earliest;
(iii) or subject to second and third provisos, in the case of an unmarried or
widowed divorced daughter, until she gets married or remarried or until she starts
earning her livelihood, whichever is earlier;
(iv) subject to sub-rule (10 A), in the case parents, who were wholly dependent on
the railway servant immediately before the death of the railway servant, for life;
(v) subject to sub-rule (10 B) and the fourth proviso, in the case of disabled
siblings (i.e. brother and sister) who were dependent on the railway servant
immediately before the death of railway servant, for life:
Provided that family pension shall continue to be payable to a childless widow on
remarriage, if her income from all other sources is less than the amount of
minimum family pension under sub-rule (2) of this rule and the dearness relief
admissible thereon:
Provided further that if the son or daughter of a railway servant is suffering from
any disorder or disability of mind including the mentally retarded or is physically
crippled or disabled so as to render him or her unable to earn a living even after
attaining the age of twenty five years, the family pension shall be payable to such
son or daughter for life subject to the following conditions, namely :-
(a) if such son or daughter is one among two or more children of the railway
servant, the family pension shall be initially payable to the minor children
(mentioned in clause (ii) or clause (iii) of this sub-rule) in the order set out in
clause (iii) of sub-rule (8) of this rule until the last child attains the age of twenty-
five years and thereafter the family pension shall be resumed in favour of the son
or daughter suffering from disorder or disability of mind, including the mentally
retarded, or who is physically crippled or disabled and shall be payable to him or
her, for life;
(b) if there are more than one such children suffering from disorder or disability of
mind including the mentally retarded or who are physically crippled or disabled,
the family pension shall be paid in the order of their birth and the younger of
them shall get the family pension only after the elder next above him or her ceases
to be eligible:
…. …. …
(d) before allowing the family pension for life to any such son or daughter, the
appointing authority shall satisfy that the handicap is of such a nature so as to
prevent him or her from earning his or her livelihood and the same shall be
evidenced by a certificate obtained from a Medical Board comprising of a Medical
Page 2 of 4
27 July 2026
P. V. Rane
6.DOC
Director or a Chief Medical Superintendent or incharge of a Zonal Hospital or
Division or his nominee as Chairperson and two other members, out of which at
least one shall be a specialist in the particular area of mental or physical disability
including mental retardation setting out, as far as possible, the exact mental or
physical condition of the child;
Explanation 1.- An unmarried son or an unmarried or widowed or divorced
daughter, except a disabled son or daughter become ineligible for family pension
under this sub-rule from the date he or she gets married or remarried.
Explanation 2.- The family pension payable to such a son or a daughter or parents
or siblings shall be stopped if he or she or they start earning his or her or their
livelihood.
Explanation 3.- It shall be the duty of son or daughter or siblings or the guardian
to furnish a certificate to the Treasury or Bank, as the case may be, once in a year
that, (i) he or she has not started earning his or her livelihood, and (ii) he or she
has not yet married or remarried and a similar certificate shall be furnished by a
childless widow after her re-marriage or by the disabled son or daughter or parents
to the Treasury or Bank, as the case may be, once in a year that she or he or they
have not started earning her or his or their livelihood.
Explanation 4.- For the purpose of this sub-rule, a member of the family shall be
deemed to be earning his or her livelihood if his or her income from other sources
is equal to or more than the minimum family pension under sub-rule (2) of this
rule and the dearness relief admissible thereon.
Explanation 5.- Parent shall be deemed to be dependent on the railway servant if
their combined income is less than the minimum family pension under sub-rule
(2) of this rule and the dearness relief admissible thereon.
Explanation 6.- Disabled sibling shall be deemed to be dependent on the railway
servant if their income is less than the minimum family pension admissible under
sub-rule (2) of this rule and dearness relief thereon.
Explanation 7.- Family pension payable to a childless widow shall be stopped if,
after remarriage, her income from all other sources becomes equal to or exceeds
the amount of minimum family pension under sub-rule (2) of this rule and the
dearness relief admissible thereon.
(Authority: Railway Board's letter No. 2011/F (E) III/1(1)9dated 23.09.13)
……
Explanation,- For the purposes of this sub-rule and sub-rule (6), "Medical Board"
means a Medical Board consisting of a Medical Director or a Chief Medical
Superintendent or Incharge of a Zonal Hospital or Division or his nominee as
Chairperson and two other members, one of them at least shall be Specialist in the
particular area of mental or physical disability.. (Authority: Notification vide letter
no. F (E) III/2008/PN 1/10 dated 22.10.08)"
(emphasis supplied)
4. We find that the petitioner is married. He has not disclosed as to when he
got married so as to apply sub rule (6) (supra). This is also reflected from the
letter dated 23 June 2020 (‘Exhibit M’ to the petition) addressed by the DRM’s
Office, Personnel Branch to the Chief Medical Superintendent, Divisional
Page 3 of 4
27 July 2026
P. V. Rane
6.DOC
Hospital, BSL, in which it has been stated:
“ With reference to the above cited subject Shri. Ashok Hari Marsale
married & Handicapped son of late Shri. Hari Totaram Marsale Ex. T/Maintainer,
under SSE (P/Way) (S) CSN applied for family pension was directed by this office
vide letter No.BSL/P/Pen/ Family Pension/ AHM dated 08/01/2020. (copy
enclosed) for medical certification that whether he can earn his livelihood.
He was examined by the Medical Board and certificate dated 13/01/2020
issued by CMS BSL that he can earn his lively hood. (copy enclosed) On the basis
of the above certificate his claim for family pension was rejected by this office vide
letter BSL/P/Pen/Family Pension dated 29/01/2020. (copy enclosed)”
5. It is clear that the petitioner is a married person. He is about 56 years of
age. Considering the rule as noted above, we are in agreement with the
respondent that the petitioner is not eligible for grant of pension.
6. Accordingly, the petition is rejected. No costs.
(AARTI SATHE, J.) (G. S. KULKARNI, J.)
Page 4 of 4
27 July 2026
P. V. Rane
Checking your session…