Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Gyan Singh vs M/O Railways on 25 March, 2026
1
Item No. 31 O.A. No. 992/2021
Court No. V
Central Administrative Tribunal
Principal Bench, New Delhi
O.A. No. 992/2021
Reserved on :- 20.02.2026
Pronounced on:- 25.03.2026
Hon'ble Mr. Rajveer Singh Verma, Member (J)
Gyan Singh,
Aged 57 Years,
S/o Sh. Ram Sajivan Singh,
Working as Trackman, Under SSE/P WAY,
Northern Railway, Gurgaon,
R/o Vill, Jawaharganj, Post Tinhapur,
Distt. Kosambhi (U.P.)
...Applicant
(By Advocates: Mr. Yogesh Sharma)
Versus
1. Union of India,
Through the General Manager,
Northern Railway,
Baroda House, New Delhi
2. The Divisional Railway Manager,
Northern Railway,
Delhi Division,
State Entry Road,
New Delhi.
...Respondents
(By Advocate: Mr. Rajeev Kumar)
SHILPI GUPTA
SHILPI GUPTA 2026.03.25
14:42:25+05'30'
2
Item No. 31 O.A. No. 992/2021
Court No. V
ORDER
By way of the present Original Application, the applicant has prayed for the following reliefs:-
"(i) That the Hon'ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to pass of an order declaring to the effect that action of the respondents not considering and not finalizing the case of the applicant for placing him in old pension scheme is illegal, arbitrary and against the rules and consequently, pass an order directing the respondents to place the applicant in old pension scheme under Rly.
Servant (Pension) Rules, 1993 after counting 50% of casual service of the applicant with all the consequential benefits.
(ii) That the Hon'ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to pass an order directing the to treat the applicant regularly appointed from 1998 at par with his junior as per the undertaking given by the respondents before the Hon'ble Tribunal on 21.3.2005 in C.P.No. 366/2004 in OA No. 420/2003 with all the consequential benefits.
(iii) Any other relief which the Hon'ble Tribunal deem fit and proper may also be granted to the applicant along with the costs of litigation."
2. Highlighting the facts of the present case, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant herein has been appointed as casual labour on 15.07.1981 under Inspector of Works, Northern Railway, New Delhi. After completion of the work, his services were disengaged on 14.12.1981 but as per the provisions of the Railway Establishment Manual (IREM) the name of the applicant was placed under live casual labour registered for re-engagement. On 05.09.2001 the SHILPI GUPTA applicant was called to submit his documents for re- SHILPI GUPTA 2026.03.25 14:42:25+05'30' engagement but his juniors were re-engaged and aggrieved of the same he filed an O.A. No. 420/2003 3 Item No. 31 O.A. No. 992/2021 Court No. V before this Tribunal. The said O.A. was disposed of on 22.08.2003 with a direction to the respondents to re- engage the applicant. However the order passed by this Tribunal was not implemented by the respondents, thus the applicant filed C.P. No. 366/2004 and the same was disposed of on 21.03.2005 on the basis of the statement given by the respondents "that the applicant would be examined in the screening test for adjudging their suitability for absorption in regular Group 'D' posts and if found suitable, they would be absorbed in Group 'D' posts from the date(s) their junior(s) have been absorbed with pay fixation and seniority." Thereafter, on 08.09.2005 the respondents re-engaged the applicant as Substitute Gangmen and regularized his services after obtaining approval from the competent authority. 2.1. He highlighted that in 2020 the applicant has come to know that his junior persons have been placed under the Old Pension Scheme, whereas, the applicant has been placed under the New Pension Scheme. The applicant thereafter submitted a request dated 30.05.2020 through the Single Window system seeking consideration under the Railway Services (Pension) SHILPI GUPTA SHILPI GUPTA 2026.03.25 Rules, 1993 in place of the National Pension Scheme in 14:42:25+05'30' 4 Item No. 31 O.A. No. 992/2021 Court No. V terms of RBE No. 28/2020 dated 03.03.2020 but till date no decision has been taken.
2.2. In support of his case, learned counsel for the applicant places reliance upon the judgment rendered by a Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in an identical matter, being O.A. No. 986/2021 in the matter of Virender Singh vs. Union of India & Anr., decided on 30.01.2025 and stated that the issue involved in the present matter is squarely covered by the ratio laid down in the aforesaid decision, wherein the Tribunal, after considering similar facts and circumstances, granted relief to the applicant therein. It is contended that the principle enunciated in the said judgment applies with full force to the present case and, therefore, the applicant is entitled to identical relief.
2.3. He also placed reliance upon the judgment of Rakesh Kumar V/s Union of India, in Civil Appeal No. 3938/2017, whereby the Hon'ble Apex Court has directed to take into consideration 50% prior to regularization and after that regularization also for the purpose of pension.
SHILPI GUPTA 3. Opposing the grant of relief, learned counsel for the SHILPI GUPTA 2026.03.25 14:42:25+05'30' respondents admitted that the applicant submitted a request dated 30.05.2020 in the prescribed format, it is 5 Item No. 31 O.A. No. 992/2021 Court No. V pertinent to note that he was specifically directed, vide letter dated 12.10.2020 bearing No. 726- 1/NPS/ADEN/HNZM/DEE/P-4 issued by Divisional Personnel Officer, New Delhi, to furnish certain essential documents within a stipulated period of 7 days; however, the applicant failed to comply with the said directions. In the absence of the requisite documents, the respondents were left with no option but to proceed on the basis of the records available with them, which action is lawful and justified.
3.1. He contended that the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 3938 of 2017 is a matter of record but is not applicable to the facts of the present case. He further contended that the applicant has admittedly failed to furnish the documents as required, and therefore the claim of the applicant is devoid of merit and liable to be dismissed.
4. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the pleadings available on record.
5. Analysis 5.1. An OA bearing O.A. No. 420/2003 was filed before SHILPI GUPTA SHILPI GUPTA 2026.03.25 14:42:25+05'30' this Tribunal by the following six applicants jointly:-
i. Bhumal, son of Shri R.I. Singh; 6 Item No. 31 O.A. No. 992/2021 Court No. V ii. Nankoo Lal, son of Sh. K.P. Singh;
iii. Gian Singh, son of Sh. Ram Sanjeevan Singh; iv. Virender Singh, son of Sh. Ram Sakhal Singh;
v. Devinder Singh, son of Sh. Shiv Lal Singh; and
vi. Som Pal, son of Sh. Mawasi
The present applicant was at serial number 3 in the said O.A. along with five other co-applicants, and this Tribunal had disposed of the said OA No. 420/2003 on 22.08.2003 with the following directions:-
"6. In the above facts and circumstances of the case, O.A. is disposed of with the following directions:-
(i) Respondents No. 2 & 3 shall make available the copy of relevant LCLR in which the names of the applicants appear to Sh. Yogesh Sharma, learned counsel for applicants at the earliest on any working day at a mutually convenient time. Learned counsel shall be permitted to take copies of the relevant portions of the register. In particular, respondents are also directed to verify their records/LCLR particularly from S1. Nos.
527A to 690 in the LCLR to ensure that that the re- engagement of the employees has been done in accordance with law, rules and instructions;
(ii) In case any person junior to the applicant in the LCLR has been re-engaged by orders of the respondents, the respondents shall take immediate action to re-engage the applicants notionally from the date when the juniors were engaged without any claims for back wages. This shall not apply to those who have been re-engaged in pursuance of Court's orders copies of the relevant orders of the court should also be made available to the learned counsel for the applicants;
(iii) Any necessary action in terms of the above, shall be taken by the respondents within six weeks from the date of inspection of the records as stated earlier." 5.2. The case of the applicant is similar to that of OA No. SHILPI GUPTA 986/2021 titled as Virender Singh vs. Union of India, who SHILPI GUPTA 2026.03.25 14:42:25+05'30' was applicant number 4 in O.A. No. 420/2003. In that case, this Tribunal had allowed the O.A. vide its order 7 Item No. 31 O.A. No. 992/2021 Court No. V dated 30.01.2025 and granted the following reliefs to the applicant therein:-
"7.1. In view of the above analysis, the present OA deserves to be allowed. The Office Order dated 23.10.2020 rejecting the case of applicant for conversion from NPS to OPS is quashed and set aside. The respondents are directed to grant the benefit of Old Pension Scheme to the applicant in light of Railway Board's Circular No. D-43/12/2018-F(E)III dated 03.03.2020 and also grant him notional benefit in terms of order dated 22.08.2003 in OA No.420/2003 for the purpose of pensionary benefit only.
7.2. Needless to mention that crucial date for determining the qualifying services for purpose of pension shall be reckoned from 22.08.2003 and not from 15.07.1981. The arrears/difference of pension be paid w.e.f 30.5.2020, i.e, from the date of application for conversion only. Necessary adjustments shall be carried out qua conversion from NPS to OPS within three months from date of receipt of a certified copy of this Order.
7.3. The OA is allowed in the aforesaid terms. Pending MAs, if any, shall also stand disposed of. No Costs."
5.3. Further, the case of the applicant is also similar to OA No. 985/2021 titled as Davinder Singh vs. Union of India, who was the applicant number 5 in the above said OA No. 420/2003. In the matter of Davinder Singh, the Division Bench of this Tribunal allowed the O.A. vide its order dated 23.09.2025 and granted the following reliefs:-
"6. In view of the above, the OA is allowed. The respondents are directed to grant the applicant the benefit of the Old Pension Scheme in light of Railway Board's Circular dated 03.03.2020, with notional SHILPI GUPTA benefit in terms of the order dated 22.08.2003 in OA No. SHILPI GUPTA 2026.03.25 420/2003 for pensionary purposes only. The crucial 14:42:25+05'30' date for determining qualifying service shall be reckoned from 22.08.2003 and arrears/difference of pension shall be paid w.e.f. 30.05.2020. Necessary adjustments for conversion from NPS to OPS shall be 8 Item No. 31 O.A. No. 992/2021 Court No. V completed within three months from receipt of a certified copy of this order.
7. Pending MAs, if any, stand disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs."
5.4. Going forward, the objections and stand taken by the respondents in the present O.A. were also taken in the cases of Virender Singh (supra) and Davinder Singh (supra) and stood rejected therein. I do not find any material distinction between the facts and issues involved in the present O.A. vis-à-vis those involved and decided in the aforesaid cases.
5.5. Judicial propriety in Indian law mandates that courts adhere to precedent, respect decisions of coordinate Benches, and follow rulings of Higher Courts to ensure legal consistency, stability, and public confidence. Violations include parallel proceedings, lower courts disregarding higher court decisions, or ignoring binding precedents.
5.6. The facts and issues involved in the present matter bear a striking similarity to those involved in the order dated 30.01.2025 passed in Virender Singh (supra) in OA No. 986/2021 and also to the order dated 23.09.2025 passed in OA No. 985/2021 in Davinder Singh (supra). SHILPI GUPTA SHILPI GUPTA 2026.03.25 14:42:25+05'30' The reasoning adopted by this Tribunal while passing orders in OA No. 986/2021 and OA No. 985/2021 is also 9 Item No. 31 O.A. No. 992/2021 Court No. V applicable to the present case. Judicial propriety demands that I have to follow the ratio laid down by the coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the absence of any distinguishing feature or contrary binding precedent.
6. Conclusion
6. In view of the above, and after following the ratio laid down in Virender Singh (supra) and Davinder Singh (supra), the present OA is allowed with the following directions:-
6.1. The respondents are directed to grant the benefits of the Old Pension Scheme to the applicant herein in accordance with the Railway Board's circular dated 03.03.2020, with notional benefits in terms of the order dated 22.08.2003 of this Tribunal passed in OA No. 420/2003 for pensionary purposes.
6.2. The respondents are directed to reckon the crucial date for determining the qualifying service from 22.08.2003 and arrears/difference of pension shall be paid to the applicant from the due date.
6.3. The respondents shall also take necessary steps for adjustments towards conversion from NPS to OPS.
SHILPI GUPTA SHILPI GUPTA 2026.03.25 14:42:25+05'30' 10 Item No. 31 O.A. No. 992/2021 Court No. V 6.4. This order shall be implemented by the respondents within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt/production of a certified copy of this order. 6.5. Pending MAs, if any, stand disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
(Rajveer Singh Verma) Member (J) /SG/ SHILPI GUPTA SHILPI GUPTA 2026.03.25 14:42:25+05'30'