Central Administrative Tribunal - Madras
T Ramadoss vs M/O Railways on 7 June, 2018
1 OA 230/2017
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
CHENNAI BENCH
OA/310/00230/2017
Dated Thursday the 7th day of June Two Thousand Eighteen
PRESENT
HON'BLE MS. BIDISHA BANERJEE, Member(J)
&
HON'BLE MS. B. BHAMATHI, Member (A)
T.Ramadoss,
S/o. Shri. Thiruvengadam,
No. 4/555, Kamban Nagar,
Parasurampatti,
K.Pudur, Madurai 625007. ....Applicant
By Advocate M/s. Ratio Legis
Vs
1.Union of India rep by,
The General Manager,
Southern Railway,
Park Town,
Chennai 600003.
2.The Sr. Divisional Finance Manager,
Madurai Division,
Southern Railway,
Madurai 625016.
3.The Divisional Personnel Officer,
Madurai Division,
Southern Railway,
Madurai 625016. ....Respondents
By Advocate Mr. A. Abdul Ajees
2 OA 230/2017
ORAL ORDER
(Pronounced by Hon'ble Ms. Bidisha Banerjee, Member(J)) The applicant has filed this OA under section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 to seek the following relief:
"8. To call for the records related to the promotion and pay fixation of the applicant in O.O.No. 16/VI/MT/2008 dated 29.04.2008 and to quash the same and further to direct the respondents to grant the applicant necessary fixation of pay in terms of Rule 1313 of the Establishment Code on his promotion from the post of Loco Pilot (Goods) Grade II to the post of Loco Pilot (Goods) Grade I, consequential arrears of pay, and, retirement benefits and to pass such other or further orders as this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper and thus render justice."
2. It is submitted that the applicant was promoted from the post of Loco Pilot (Goods) Grade II to Loco Pilot (Goods) Grade I w.e.f., 01.04.2008. He retired on 30.04.2014 as Loco Pilot (Passenger). He made a representation on 14.07.2016 for re-fixation of his pay as per 6th CPC recommendations along with consequential benefits which is still pending for consideration. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant would be satisfied if the 1 st respondent is directed to consider the representation within a time limit to be stipulated by this Tribunal.
3. Learned counsel for the respondents has no objection to the same.
4. Therefore, to meet the ends of justice and without going into the merits of the case, we deem it appropriate to direct the 1 st respondent to consider the representation of the applicant dated 14.07.2016 at 3 OA 230/2017 Annexure A3 in accordance with law and also in consideration of the pleadings made by the applicant in this OA and pass a reasoned and speaking order thereon, within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.
5. OA is disposed of with the above directions. No order as to costs.
(B.Bhamathi) (Bidisha Banerjee)
Member (A) Member(J)
07.06.2018
SKSI