Central Administrative Tribunal - Patna
Omprakash Singh vs South Eastern Railway on 22 August, 2024
1 O.A. No. 051/00689/2024
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
PATNA BENCH, PATNA
CIRCUIT BENCH AT RANCHI
Date of order:- 22.08.2024
CORAM
HON'BLE MR. AJAY PRATAP SINGH, MEMBER [J]
1. O.A. No. 051/00689/2024
Ramjyoish Yadav agaed about 50 years s/o Late Parma
Chaudhary, resident of hankarpur, Gopalganj, musahri Bazar, P.o.
Musahri Bazar, P.S. Gopalganj, District Gopalganj, Bihar.
.......... Applicants.
-Versus-
1. Union of India through General Manager, South Eastern Railway,
P.O. and P.S. Garden Reach, Kolkata-700043.
Patna 2. The Chief Commercial Officer, South Eastern Railway, 14 Strand
Bench
Road, Kokata-700001.
3. The Chief Catering Manager, South Eastern Railway. 14 Strand
Road, Kokata-700001
4. The Divisional Railway Manager (P), South Eastern Railway.
Chakradharpur Division, Chakradharpur, District WestSinghbhum.
Pin - 833102
........Respondents
For Applicants:- Shri A.K. Mahto, Advocate
For Respondents:- Shri Rajendra Krishna, Sr. Central Govt.
Standing Counsel
2. O.A. No. 051/00690/2024
Omprakash Singh aged about 39 years sone of late Rameshwar
Singh, resident of Gopalganj, P.O. and P.S. Gopalganj, District
Gopalganj, Bihar.
.......... Applicants.
-Versus-
1. Union of India through General Manager, South Eastern Railway,
P.O. and P.S. Garden Reach, Kolkata-700043.
2. The Chief Commercial Officer, South Eastern Railway, 14 Strand
Road, Kokata-700001.
3. The Chief Catering Manager, South Eastern Railway. 14 Strand
Road, Kokata-700001
4. The Divisional Railway Manager (P), South Eastern Railway.
Chakradharpur Division, Chakradharpur, District WestSinghbhum.
Pin - 833102
2 O.A. No. 051/00689/2024
........Respondents
For Applicants:- Shri A.K. Mahto, Advocate
For Respondents:- Shri Rajendra Krishna, Sr. Central Govt.
Standing Counsel
3. O.A. No. 051/00691/2024
Sarwwati Devi aged about 79 years W/o late Chandrika Singh,
resident of hankarpur, Suaraha, P.O. Musahri Bazar, P.S.
Gopalganj, District Gopalganj, Bihar.
.......... Applicants.
-Versus-
1. Union of India through General Manager, South Eastern Railway,
P.O. and P.S. Garden Reach, Kolkata-700043.
2. The Chief Commercial Officer, South Eastern Railway, 14 Strand
Road, Kokata-700001.
3. The Chief Catering Manager, South Eastern Railway. 14 Strand
Patna
Bench Road, Kokata-700001
4. The Divisional Railway Manager (P), South Eastern Railway.
Chakradharpur Division, Chakradharpur, District WestSinghbhum.
Pin - 833102
........Respondents
For Applicants:- Shri A.K. Mahto, Advocate
For Respondents:- Shri Rajendra Krishna, Sr. Central Govt.
Standing Counsel
4. O.A. No. 051/00692/2024
Chaturi Singh@ Anar Singh aged about 84 years son of
Dudhnath Singh r/o Village Deoria Dhus, Pathardewa, P.O. and
P.S. Pathardewa, District Deoria, Uttar Pradesh.
.......... Applicants.
-Versus-
1. Union of India through General Manager, South Eastern Railway,
P.O. and P.S. Garden Reach, Kolkata-700043.
2. The Chief Commercial Officer, South Eastern Railway, 14 Strand
Road, Kokata-700001.
3. The Chief Catering Manager, South Eastern Railway. 14 Strand
Road, Kokata-700001
4. The Divisional Railway Manager (P), South Eastern Railway.
Chakradharpur Division, Chakradharpur, District WestSinghbhum.
Pin - 833102
........Respondents
3 O.A. No. 051/00689/2024
For Applicants:- Shri A.K. Mahto, Advocate
For Respondents:- Shri Rajendra Krishna, Sr. Central Govt.
Standing Counsel
ORDER
AS PER:- AJAY PRATAP SINGH, MEMBER[JUDICIAL]
1. All four original applications raise common issue and are based on almost similar facts and represented by same counsels. With the consent of ld. counsel appearing for the parties cases taken up at admission stage. It shall be sufficient to note in detail the facts of lead case OA No. 689/2024 (Ramjyoish Yadav Vs. Union of India) for appreciating issue Patna raised in all four original applications.
Bench
2. Original applications have been filed by the applicants seeking direction to respondents to reckon 50% of services rendered by employee as commission vendors prior to date of regularization of services in Railways. The applicants are son in OA No. 689/2024 & 690/2024, wife in OA No. 691/2024 and pensioner in OA No. 692/2024 seeking direction to grant benefits of reckoning services rendered by their deceased employee as commission vendors as per direction of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Union of India and Ors. Vs. Munshi Ram in Civil Appeal No. 2811 of 2024 decided on 31.10.2022. So also to sanction, settle and grant pension and family pension along with pensionary benefits arrears due to deceased fathers and applicants.
3. Briefly stated facts of lead case in OA No. 689/2024 (Ramjyoish Yadav Vs. Union of India) father of applicant was engaged as commission vendor in the year 1970 in the catering division of SER. 4 O.A. No. 051/00689/2024 Thereafter on 18.09.2002 regularized as railways employee and superannuated on 31.05.2008. The respondents have delayed regularization and have not granted benefit of ratio laid down in case of Munsi Ram (Supra). The father of applicant died and respondents did not grant pension on the anvil that father was not having ten years' qualifying service required for grant of pension and pensionary benefits. It is also the case of applicant that father of applicant has died and did not receive all pension and pensionary benefits. The applicant is placing reliance on law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in similar facts Patna Bench and circumstances in case of Munsi Ram (Supra)seeking direction to respondents to count services rendered as commission vendors as 50% for counting towards qualifying service and 100% service from date of regularization till superannuation. The further case of the applicant is that deceased father has rendered more than 38 years of services as commission vendors and about five years as regular employee and they have completed more than 20 years of qualifying service. They are entitled for pension and family pension and other pensionary benefits but respondents have infringed vested legal rights guaranteed to them.
4. Shri A.K. Mahto, Ld. counsel for applicant contended that applicants have rendered more than 38 years of services as commission vendors and they are entitled for reckoning 50% of said service towards qualifying service in view of law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Union of India and Ors. Vs.Munsi Ram (Supra). 5 O.A. No. 051/00689/2024
5. Shri A.K. Mahto after arguing for some time submits that deceased railway employee were entitled for pension, family pension and pensionary benefits by reckoning 50% of service as commission vendors towards qualifying service but respondents have denied benefits of ratio laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Union of India and Ors.Vs. Munsi Ram (Supra).
6. Shri A.K. Mahto also submits that applicant will be satisfied if direction is given to respondents to consider pending representations of applicants in light of law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in case Patna Bench of Union of India and Ors. Vs. Munsi Ram (Supra).
7. Shri Rajendra Krishna, Ld. Sr. CGSC fairly submits that pending representations of applicant shall be examined in light of law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Union of India and Ors. Munsi Ram (Supra), if applicants are found entitled, same shall be granted.
8. In view of above submissions, without entering into the merit of the case principle of natural justice will be met and this Tribunal hereby directs respondents/competent authority to take decision and pass a reasoned and speaking order in light of law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Union of India and Ors. Vs. Munshi Ram in Civil Appeal No. 2811 of 2024 decided on 31.10.2022and respondents shall also consider and decide the representation of applicants within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order passed today.
6 O.A. No. 051/00689/2024
9. It is also directed that if cases of deceased employee and applicants have been found entitled for pension, family pension and pensionary benefits and arrears same shall be settled and released forthwithwith all consequential benefits accordance with statutory rules applicable.
10. With above observations and directions, OA stands disposed of at admission stage itself. No order as to cost.
11. A copy of this order be kept in each concerned file.
(Ajay Pratap Singh)
Judicial Member
Central Administrative Tribunal,
Patna Patna Bench, Patna.
Bench
Circuit Bench at Ranchi
du/-