Central Administrative Tribunal - Bangalore
Sampangi Ramaiah vs Central Silk Board on 7 April, 2026
1 OA 271/2025/CAT/BANGALORE BENCH
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
BANGALORE BENCH, BENGALURU
ORIGINAL APPLICATION NOS.170/00271/2025
ORDER RSERVED ON: 30.03.2026
DATE OF ORDER: 07.04.2026
CORAM
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE S. SUJATHA ...MEMBER(J)
HON'BLE DR.SANJIV KUMAR ...MEMBER(A)
Shri Sampangi Ramaiah,
66 years,
Assistant Director (A&A) Retd.,
Central Silk Board,
Ministry of Textiles,
Government of India,
BTM Layout, Madiwala,
BANGALORE -560068.
R/at #1301, 16th main, Cauvery Road,
BTM 4th Stage, 2nd Block,
Opp. To Devarachikkanahally RTO.,
BANGALORE-560076. ....Applicant
(Party in person)
Vs.
1. The Joint Secretary (Silk),
Ministry of Textiles,
Government of India,
Udyog Bhavan, Maulana Azad Road,
New Delhi-110011.
S Sarala Devi
CAT Bangalore
S Sarala Devi
2026.04.07 16:41:11+
2 OA 271/2025/CAT/BANGALORE BENCH
2. The Member Secretary,
Central Silk Board,
Ministry of Textiles, GOI,
Madiwala, Hosur Road,
Bengaluru-560068.
3. The Director [Finance],
Central Silk Board,
Ministry of Textiles, GOI,
Madiwala, Hosur Road,
Bengaluru-560068 ...Respondents
(By Advocate, Shri K.Gajendra Vasu)
ORDER
Per: Justice S.Sujatha ...........Member(J)
The applicant has filed this original application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 seeking the following reliefs:
"a) It is prayed to call for the records pertaining to the case.
b) It is prayed to set aside the impugned order No.CSB-
6(2523)/17-18/PEN dated 22.01.2025 (Annexure A3) passed by Respondent No.2.
S Sarala Devi CAT Bangalore S Sarala Devi 2026.04.07 16:41:11+ 3 OA 271/2025/CAT/BANGALORE BENCH
c) It is prayed to issue an order or an appropriate direction to the 2nd Respondent to recompute the gratuity benefit as per the statutory provisions as mentioned in the grounds para and arrange the differential amount of gratuity along with 10% statutory interest as per the enclosed statement within a reasonable time."
2. Briefly stated the facts as narrated by the applicant are that he has joined Central Silk Board ('CSB' for short) as LDC on 29.10.1982 and progressed up to Assistant Director (A&A) and retired on superannuation on the afternoon of 28.02.2018. It is the grievance of the applicant that the CSB has failed to consider the beneficial provisions of the statute on gratuity i.e., Sections 4 and 14 of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, ('PG Act' for short) which has resulted in denial of his statutory right as well as less receipt/payment of gratuity benefits. The representation dated 30.12.2024 submitted by the applicant in this regard has been rejected by the 2nd Respondent vide communication dated 22.01.2025. Being aggrieved, the applicant has preferred this OA. S Sarala Devi CAT Bangalore S Sarala Devi 2026.04.07 16:41:11+ 4 OA 271/2025/CAT/BANGALORE BENCH
3. The applicant appearing in person submitted that the PG Act, has come into force with effect from 16.09.1972. In terms of Section 4 of the Act, gratuity shall be payable to an employee on the termination of his employment after he has rendered continuous service for not less than five years - (a) on his superannuation, or (b) on his retirement or resignation, or (c) on his death or disablement due to accident or disease, however, with the proviso's thereof. Section 14 of the Act has overriding effect on other enactments etc. The Central Silk Board is a statutory functionary established by law in India by virtue of Central Silk Board Act, 1948 (LXI of 1948) and expected to function under the provisions of the said Act and Rules framed thereunder. Though the CSB has been under the administrative control of Ministry of Textiles, Government of India, CSB enjoys absolute autonomy in the matter of internal administration, recruitment of staff, labourers and also their conditions of service. As per Rule 28A of the Central Silk Board Rules, 1955, ('Rules' for short) even employee of the Board other than an employee who is on deputation to the Board, shall be entitled to pension and death-cum-retirement gratuity including family S Sarala Devi CAT Bangalore S Sarala Devi 2026.04.07 16:41:11+ 5 OA 271/2025/CAT/BANGALORE BENCH pension, extraordinary pension, and commutation pension at such rates and under such conditions as are prescribed in the Liberalised Pension Rules by the Central Government for its employees of the corresponding grades. In terms of the explanation appended thereto, in this rule, "Liberalised Pension rules" means the Liberalised pension rules of the Central Government for the time being in force, regarding the grant of pension and gratuity to it employees.
4. The CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 came into force with effect from 01.06.1972 and the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 with effect from 16.09.1972. PG Act being subsequent enactment having an overriding effect, shall prevail, more so if they are more beneficial.
5. The applicant would point out that as per the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972, the service is truncated to 33 years, whereas as per the PG Act, the entire continuous service shall be considered for computation of gratuity. The formulae for computation under CCS (Pension) rules, 1972 is as under:
Emoluments + DA x 15/30 x Qualifying service S Sarala Devi CAT Bangalore S Sarala Devi 2026.04.07 16:41:11+
6 OA 271/2025/CAT/BANGALORE BENCH Whereas under PG Act, the formulae is as under:
Emoluments + DA x 15/26 x No. of years of service Gratuity under the PG Act being more beneficial to the employees of CSB, the same is applicable. Hence the rejection of the request of the applicant for payment of gratuity arrears under PG Act, is wholly unjustifiable.
6. Applicant has placed reliance on the following decisions:
1. Municipal Corporation of Delhi vs. Dharam Prakash Sharma - AIR 1999 SC 293
2. The Senior Divisional Personnel Officer, Southern Railway, Salem vs. M.Murugan - O.P. (LC) No.2450/2012 DD: 10.02.2015 - High Court of Kerala
3. Mangt of M/S D.T.C. v. Dharam Pal Singh & another -
W.P. (C) No.18089/2004 and C.M.Nos.13649/2004 & 13650/2004 DD: 16.12.2022 - High Court of Delhi.
4. Sirajuddin Surkhi and others vs. Union of India and others - OA.No.367/2021 DD:12.07.2023 -C.A.T., Bangalore Bench.
S Sarala Devi CAT Bangalore S Sarala Devi 2026.04.07 16:41:11+ 7 OA 271/2025/CAT/BANGALORE BENCH Distinguishing the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of N.Manoharan ETC vs. the Administrative Officer and another with allied matters, reported in 2026 Livelaw (SC) 137, [Civil Appeal Nos. --/2026 @ Special Leave Petition (Civil) Nos. 22628- 22637/2024 DD:11.02.2026], the applicant submitted that the regular employees of the CSB are not civil servants "in the strict sense of Article 311 for all purposes, they are employees of a controlled organisation".
7. Learned Counsel Shri K.Gajendra Vasu representing the respondents submitted that the Central Silk Board is a statutory body created by an Act of Parliament namely, the Central Silk Board Act, 1948. The Central Silk Board is functioning under the administrative control of Ministry of Textiles, Government of India. The applicant joined the services of CSB on 29.10.1982 as LDC and rendered continuous service till his retirement on attaining the age of superannuation on 28.02.2018 as Assistant Director. His qualifying service was calculated as 35 years 4 months and 3 days in terms of CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972. Being a Central Government employee under the administrative control of Ministry of Textiles, Government S Sarala Devi CAT Bangalore S Sarala Devi 2026.04.07 16:41:11+ 8 OA 271/2025/CAT/BANGALORE BENCH of India, the service conditions of the applicant, including retirement benefits are governed by CSB Rules, 1955 read with CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972. Accordingly, upon his retirement the applicant's case for retirement gratuity was processed strictly in accordance with Rule 45, (earlier Rule 44) of CCS (pension) Rules, 1972. The retirement gratuity totally amounting to Rs.13,71,794/- in full and final entitlement admissible under CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 was paid. The applicant at the time of retirement accepted the gratuity amount as calculated under the CCS (Pension) Rules without any protest or reservation. The sanction and payment orders were duly communicated to him and no objection was raised at that stage. Having already availed the benefits under CCS (Pension) Rules, the applicant is estopped from seeking re-computation of gratuity under PG Act, which is not applicable to the Central Government employees governed by the statutory pension Rules framed under Article 309 of the Constitution of India. Placing reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in N.Manoharan, supra, submitted that the applicant is not coming within the ambit of employee under Section 2(e) of PG Act, since the applicant held a S Sarala Devi CAT Bangalore S Sarala Devi 2026.04.07 16:41:11+ 9 OA 271/2025/CAT/BANGALORE BENCH post under CSB, which is governed by CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972. He falls squarely within the exclusion clause, consequently Section 14 cannot be invoked to override the CCS (Pension) Rules in his case. Thus justifying the impugned order, learned Counsel seeks for dismissal of the OA.
8. Heard the applicant appearing in person as well as the learned Counsel for the respondents and perused the material on record.
9. The moot point that arises for our consideration is, whether the applicant, an employee of CSB functioning under the administrative control of Ministry of Textiles, Government of India, is covered by the provisions of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972?
10. The Central Silk Board is a statutory body created by an Act of Parliament namely, the Central Silk Board Act, 1948. The predominant function of the Board is research and development in the field of sericulture. To carry out its activities, the Board has established a network of units across the country. The staff of the CSB includes scientific, administrative, technical and other S Sarala Devi CAT Bangalore S Sarala Devi 2026.04.07 16:41:11+ 10 OA 271/2025/CAT/BANGALORE BENCH operational and supporting staff. The Board follows all the service conditions as applicable to Central Government employees to regulate the service conditions of the employees of the Board. As such, the FRSR, CCS (Leave) Rules, CCS (Conduct) Rules, CCS (CCA) Rules, CCS (Pension) Rules and other service rules of Government of India apply mutatis mutandis to CSB employees. The CSB is functioning under the administrative control of Ministry of Textiles, Government of India.
11. Section 2(e) of Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 as applicable at the relevant point of time, reads thus:
"2(e) "employee" means any person (other than an apprentice) who is employed for wages, whether the terms of such employment are express or implied, in any kind of work, manual or otherwise, in or in connection with the work of a factory, mine, oilfield, plantation, port, railway company, shop or other establishment to which this Act applies, but does not include any such person who holds a post under the Central Government or a State Government and is governed by any other Act or by any rules providing for payment of gratuity;.
S Sarala Devi CAT Bangalore S Sarala Devi 2026.04.07 16:41:11+ 11 OA 271/2025/CAT/BANGALORE BENCH
12. The said provision has two limbs, first limb deals with the inclusive definition and the 2nd limb with exclusive definition. This provision has been analytically examined by the Hon'ble Apex Court in N.Manoharan supra, wherein it is observed thus:
"10. The applicability or inapplicability of the PG Act, to begin with, depends on whether the employee comes within the inclusive definition or the exclusive definition. The same is dependent on jurisdictional facts. In Arun Kumar v. Union of India [(2007) 1 SCC 732], it has been held that a jurisdictional fact is a fact which must exist before a court, tribunal, or authority assumes jurisdiction over a particular matter. A jurisdictional fact is one on the existence or non- existence of which depends the jurisdiction of a court, a tribunal or an authority. It is the fact upon which an administrative agency's power to act depends. If the jurisdictional fact does not exist, the court, authority or officer cannot act. If a court or authority wrongly assumes the existence of such a fact, the order can be questioned by a writ of certiorari. The underlying principle is that by erroneously assuming the existence of such a jurisdictional fact, no authority can confer upon itself jurisdiction which it otherwise does not possess.
S Sarala Devi CAT Bangalore S Sarala Devi 2026.04.07 16:41:11+
12 OA 271/2025/CAT/BANGALORE BENCH
11. It is axiomatic that a decision is an authority for what it decides and not what can be logically deduced therefrom. In our view, the decision in MCD (supra) cannot be an authority for deciding the applicability of the PG Act to the employees of HWP. We cannot logically also deduce the similarity of circumstances in the corporate entity of Municipal Corporation of Delhi and an annexe of the DAE. Therefore, the applicability is determined by the facts of the case considered by the tribunal/court.
12. It is relevant to notice that the amended definition deals with the first limb of Section 2(e),3 and the second exclusionary limb is the same in the pre- and post- amendment provisions. Construing Section 2(e), the second limb begins with the words "but does not include" any such person (i) who holds a post under the Central Government,
(ii) a State Government, (iii) is governed by any other Act or (iv) by any Rules providing payment of gratuity. The exclusionary clause, if read by applying the golden rule without a further test, Pre-Amendment Post-Amendment "employee" means any "employee" means any person (other than an person (other than an apprentice) employed on apprentice) who is wages, in any employed for wages, establishment, factory, whether the term such S Sarala Devi CAT Bangalore S Sarala Devi 2026.04.07 16:41:11+ 13 OA 271/2025/CAT/BANGALORE BENCH mine, oilfield, plantation, employment are express port, railway company or or implied, in any; kind shop to do any skilled, of work, manual or semi-skilled, or otherwise, in or in unskilled, manual, connection with the work supervisory, technical or of a factory, mine, clerical work, whether oilfield, plantation port, the terms of employment railway company, shop are express or implied, or other establishment to and whether or not such which this Act applies, person is employed in a but does not include any managerial or such person who holds a administrative capacity, post under the Central but does not include any Government or a State such person who holds a Government and is post under the Central governed by any other Government or a State Act or by any rules Government and is providing for payment of governed by any other gratuity."
Act or by any rules providing for payment of gratuity."
excludes employees of the Central and State Governments from the meaning of "employee" under the PG Act. Secondly, it also excludes a person who is governed by any other act. Thirdly, even if it is used as "or" but not as "and", it excludes any such person who is governed by any other Act or by any rules providing for payment of gratuity. The provision contains the words both "means" and "does not include". Under interpretation of statutes, this Court has repeatedly held that coupling the word "means" with S Sarala Devi CAT Bangalore S Sarala Devi 2026.04.07 16:41:11+ 14 OA 271/2025/CAT/BANGALORE BENCH "includes" denotes an exhaustive definition. Conversely, the word "means" and "does not include" should be read as exclusionary language that strictly excludes the scope of the provision from certain classes. Consequently, a person who is governed by any other Act, or governed by any Rules providing for payment of gratuity, does not come within the ambit of the definition of "employee" under the PG Act."
13. The ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court that a person who is governed by any other Act or governed by any Rules providing for payment of gratuity, does not come within the ambit of definition of 'employee' under the PG Act, would certainly oust the applicant from inclusive definition bringing it under the exclusive definition of Section 2(e) of the PG Act.
14. The arguments of the applicant that the employees of CSB are not civil servants in strict sense of Article 311 and they being governed by Rule 28A of CSB Rules for grant of pension and death- cum-retirement gratuity benefits to its employees, they come within the inclusive definition of Section 2(e) of PG Act, is totally misconceived.
S Sarala Devi CAT Bangalore S Sarala Devi 2026.04.07 16:41:11+ 15 OA 271/2025/CAT/BANGALORE BENCH
15. The object of CSB Act as enumerated in the enactment is to provide for development under central control of the silk industry and for that purpose to establish a Central Silk Board. Section-2 of the Act is significant to note inasmuch as its control by the union. Section-2 reads thus:
"2. Declaration as to expediency of Union Control: It is hereby declared that it is expedient in the public interest that the Union should take under its control the silk industry."
16. Section 4 of the CSB Act, contemplates for the constitution of the Board, Section 4(1) reads as under:
"4. Constitution of the Board:
(1) As soon as may be after the commencement of this Act, the Central Government shall, by notification in the official Gazette, constitute for the purposes of this Act, a Board to be called the Central Silk Board."
17. Section 5 of the CSB Act deals with the power of the Central Government in default of nominations, which reads thus:
"5. Power of the Central Government in default of nominations :
S Sarala Devi CAT Bangalore S Sarala Devi 2026.04.07 16:41:11+ 16 OA 271/2025/CAT/BANGALORE BENCH (1) If any Government other than the Central Government fails to make any nomination which it is entitled to make under subsection (3) of Section 4 within the time prescribed in that behalf, the Central Government may make the nomination itself."
18. Section 11 which deals with the control by the Central Government, plays a pivotal role in deciding the issue on hand. The said provision is quoted hereunder for ready reference:
"11. Control by the Central Government:
(1) All acts of the Board shall be subject to the control of the Central Government which may cancel, suspend or modify as it thinks fit any action taken, or order passed, by the Board."
19. Section 13 is enabling provision to make rules under the CSB Act, such power is vested with Central Government. Section 13(1) reads thus:
"13. Power of Central Government to make rules:
(1) The Central Government may by notification in the official Gazette, make rules to carry out the purposes of this Act."
S Sarala Devi CAT Bangalore S Sarala Devi 2026.04.07 16:41:11+ 17 OA 271/2025/CAT/BANGALORE BENCH
20. CSB Rules, 1955 are framed exercising the powers conferred under Section 13 of the CSB Act, 1948. Rule 28A of the CSB Rules reads thus:
"28A. Pension-cum-gratuity benefits to the employees of the Board: Every employee of the Board, other than an employee who is on deputation to the Board, shall be entitled to pension, and death-cum-retirement gratuity (including family pension, extraordinary pension, and commutation pension) at such rates and under such conditions as are prescribed in the Liberalised Pension Rules by the Central Government for its employees of the corresponding grades;
Provided that any such employee who was in the service of the Board before the 1st April 1966, and is continuing in such service on the 31st December, 1966, may within three months from the date last mentioned, opt, in writing, for the benefits of the Central Silk Board Contributory Provident Fund Rules, in which case nothing in this rule shall apply to such employees;
Provided further that where the Contributory Provident Fund accounts of any person who was in the service of the Board on the 1st April 1966, and who ceased to be in such service after that date but before the 31st December, 1966, S Sarala Devi CAT Bangalore S Sarala Devi 2026.04.07 16:41:11+ 18 OA 271/2025/CAT/BANGALORE BENCH due to retirement on superannuation or death, have not been settled before the date last mentioned, then, such person shall be deemed to have opted to be governed by this rule.
Explanation: In this rule, "Liberalised Pension Rules" means the Liberalised Pension Rules of the Central Government, for the time being in force, regarding the grant of pension and gratuity to its employees."
21. Rule 28A of the Rules specifies about entitlement of pension-cum-gratuity benefits to the employees of the Board as are prescribed in the Liberalised Pension Rules by the Central Government for its employees of the corresponding grade. Further in the explanation appended thereto, it has been clarified that Liberalised pension Rules means Liberalised pension rules of the Central Government, for the time being in force, regarding grant of pension and gratuity to its employees, the Pension and Gratuity Rules of the Central Government are applicable. Thus, the applicant is governed by the Rules provided for payment of gratuity and pension rules of the Central Government for the time being in force. Hence, CCS (Pension) Rules of 1972 were made applicable. S Sarala Devi CAT Bangalore S Sarala Devi 2026.04.07 16:41:11+ 19 OA 271/2025/CAT/BANGALORE BENCH
22. In the light of the aforesaid provisions read with the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in N.Manoharan supra, it cannot be held that the applicant is covered under the first limb of Section 2(e) of PG Act i..e, in the inclusive definition.
23. The judgment in Municipal Corporation of Delhi, supra has been considered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in N.Manoharan etc., supra and categorically observed in Para-11 ibid. It is held that the decision in Municipal Corporation of Delhi supra, cannot be an authority for deciding the applicability of PG Act to the employees of Heavy Water Plant. No similarity of circumstances in the corporate entity on Municipal Corporation of Delhi supra and an annex of the DAE is deduced, as observed in Para-11. The same analogy applies to the present set of facts as CSB is fully controlled by the Central Government.
24. It cannot be disputed that the CSB is not incorporated under the Companies Act, is not registered as a PSU or functions as a S Sarala Devi CAT Bangalore S Sarala Devi 2026.04.07 16:41:11+ 20 OA 271/2025/CAT/BANGALORE BENCH Government company. It operates under the administrative control of the Ministry of Textiles, Government of India. In other words, the control of the CSB is under the Central Government.
25. This Bench has declared Railway Department being ousted from definition clause of employee under Section 2(e) of PG Act (OA No.626/2023 DD:27.03.2025), as coming under the exclusion clause placing reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble High Court for the State of Telangana in The General Manager, South Central Railway and another vs. The Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central) and Controlling Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 and another. [Writ Appeal No.1130/2016 and connected matters, DD: 31.01.2025.]
26. The other judgments cited by the applicant are distinguishable and cannot be made applicable to the facts of the present case.
27. Another important point to be considered by us is the maintainability of the claim made by the applicant having accepted S Sarala Devi CAT Bangalore S Sarala Devi 2026.04.07 16:41:11+ 21 OA 271/2025/CAT/BANGALORE BENCH the retirement beneficiary and gratuity benefits under the provisions of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 at the time of his retirement on 28.02.2018 without any protest or demur. The applicant is estopped from claiming the gratuity benefits under the PG Act. The CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 constitutes a self-contained statutory scheme, deliberately prescribing the terms for pension and gratuity, including the maximum qualifying service and the formula for computation. The applicant's gratuity amount was quantified under the said scheme - CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972. At no point of time, the amount of gratuity was determined by the controlling authority under the provisions of the PG Act. In terms of the PG Act under Section 7, any person aggrieved by an order under Sub-Section (4) of Section-7 may prefer an appeal to the appropriate Government or such other authority as may be specified by the appropriate Government in this behalf subject to limitation provided therein. The applicant having not raised his voice till the filing of representation dated 30.12.2024 on the subject involved, OA is liable to be dismissed for delay and laches apart from the limitation provided under Section 21 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985. Filing S Sarala Devi CAT Bangalore S Sarala Devi 2026.04.07 16:41:11+ 22 OA 271/2025/CAT/BANGALORE BENCH of belated representation would not extend the period of limitation as decided by catena of judgments.
28. Thus, referring to Rule 28A of the CSB Rules, it has been held by the Respondent No.2 that the retired employees of the CSB are eligible for pension and gratuity as per CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 only.
29. For the reasons aforesaid, no exception can be found with the impugned order. Viewed from any angle, OA lacks merit, accordingly, stands dismissed.
No order as to costs.
sd/- sd/-
(DR. SANJIV KUMAR) (JUSTICE S. SUJATHA)
MEMBER(A) MEMBER(J)
sd.
S Sarala Devi
CAT Bangalore
S Sarala Devi
2026.04.07 16:41:11+