Central Administrative Tribunal - Allahabad
Ram Bahadur Son Of Late Sukhwasi Lal vs Union Of India Through General Manager on 21 October, 2011
(OPEN COURT) CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL ALLAHABAD BENCH ALLAHABAD ALLAHABAD this the 21th day of October, 2011. HONBLE MR. SANJEEV KAUSHIK, MEMBER - J. HONBLE MR. SHASHI PRAKASH, MEMBER- A. ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO. 1603 OF 2005 Ram Bahadur son of late Sukhwasi Lal, aged about 71 years, retired Head Clerk, N.E. Railway, Pilibhit r/o 1561/29-Munni Ka Adda, P.O. ITI Civil Lines, Etawah. Applicant V E R S U S 1. Union of India through General Manager, N.E. Railway, Hd. Qrs. Office, Gorakhpur. 2. Divisional Railway Manager, N.E. Railway, Izatnagar, Bareillt. 3. Sr. Divisional Mechanical Engineer, N.E. Railway, Izatnagar, Bareilly. 4. Sr. Divisional Personnel Officer, N.E. Railway, Izatnagar, Bareilly. ..Respondents Advocate for applicant : Sri. Sudama Ram Advocate for the respondents : Sri Anil Dwivedi O R D E R
BY Honble Mr. Sanjeev Kaushik, J.M..
By way of the instant original application filed under section 19 of Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, the applicant has prayed for following main relief/s: -
a). to do fixation of his pay correctly in respect of junior person named Sri Bhagwan Das, ex O.S I, Mech under LF/N.E. Railway, Pilibhit, who was promoted during pendency of the court case and pay the arrears thereof as per rules;
b). to revise the pension and other pensionary benefits including arisen due to 5th Pay Commission Report with effect from 1.1.1996 and pay the arrears of pension, gratuity etc. on the revised fixation of pay;
c). to direct the respondents to supply the copy of the PPO issued in favour of the applicant, Service Certificate on retirement, Medical Assistance Card for retired employee as admissible as per rules;
d). to direct the respondents to provide the complimentary passes of Ist Class as admissible under the Rules for 2005 and pay compensation for non-issuing the same for the last several years.
2. The solitary contention raised by the learned counsel for the applicant is that despite the order dated 17.03.1992 passed in earlier round of litigation in T.A No. 1807/87 (T) the applicant has not been given the benefits. He drawn our attention to the order passed by this Tribunal on 17.03.1992 particularly para 13 to the effect that by this order the Tribunal quashed the order dated 31.05.1984 and 11.09.1984 and ordered to reinstate the applicant in service with immediate effect with all consequential reliefs under the rules. He argued that the respondents have given the benefit only upto the date when the applicant was removed from service but the benefit of intervening period during which the person junior to the applicant has been promoted, has not been given.
3. On the other hand counsel for the respondents submitted that they have taken categorical stand in para 1 of the C.A which reads as under : -
1. ......The applicant was initially appointed as clerk on 19.07.1958 in the office of CME/N.E Railway, Gorakhpur. Later on he was promoted and transferred on 1.4.1980 in loco shed Kathgodam. While he was working as head clerk at Kathgodam he was further transferred from Kathgodam to Pilibhit on 3.11.1981. Since he did not join there, he was charge sheeted and removed from service w.e.f. 31.05.1984 under DAR and his appeal was also rejected by ADRM/ Izatnagar on 11.9.1984. The applicant filed the writ petition No. 4033 of 1985 before the Honble High Court, Allahabad, which was transferred and registered as T.A No. 1807/87 (T) before this Tribunal. Honble Tribunal given judgment dated 17.03.1992 and allowed the above petition of the petitioner and quash the impugned orders dated 31.05.1984 and 11.9.1984, the petitioner was reinstated in service with immediate effect with all consequential benefits, as per rules. It is made clear that it shall be open to the respondents to proceed with the disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner in accordance law. The respondents are directed to make payment of all the arrears, for which petitioner is found to be entitled by way of consequential benefits.
Respondents given benefit of the period from the date of removal to the date of retirement of 31.07.1992 treating on duty and due amount on this account Rs. 1,98,499 was paid through a cheque. The applicant has filed Original Application No. 1603/2005 and demanding promotion against his junior Shri Bhagwan Dass O.S I, complementary pass and service certificate. With regard to the promotion, the reply of the respondents is silent.
4. We have considered the rival submissions and have gone through the pleadings.
5. Admittedly by order dated 17.03.1992 the applicant was held entitled for all consequential benefits on his reinstatement in service. Operative para of the judgment dated 17.03.1992 reads as under : -
Consequently, we allow the above petition of the petitioner quash the impugned orders dated 31.5.1984 and 11.9.84, as referred to above and the petitioner is re-instated in service with immediate effect with all consequential benefits, as per rules. It is made clear that it shall be open to the respondents to proceed with the disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner in accordance with law. The respondents are directed to make payments of all arrears, for which the petitioner is found to be entitled by way of consequential benefits , to the petitioner within three months from the date of the receipt of the copy of this judgment and we order accordingly. ........
6. We have also gone through the instructions issued by the Railway Board dated 01.10.1997 (Annexure RA-1) in which in para 3, Railway Board itself have clarified that if an employee, who is exonerated after finalization of disciplinary proceedings has to be promoted in his turn. It is further clarified that his date of promotion is determined with reference to his position in the panel/suitability list. In para 4 it has further been clarified that ......While in the case of a serving employee that period will be the intervening period from the date of effect of notional promotion to the date of actual promotion, for a retired employee, this intervening period will be from the date of effect of notional promotion to the date of his retirement. Further the arrears of pay, where ever granted and the extent thereof, will also count for calculation of pensionary benefits of the employee concrned..
7. Once the Railway Board themselves have clarified that on exoneration of the charges the employee is entitled to consequential benefit and the Tribunal vide order dated 17.03.1992 held the applicant entitled for the same, therefore, we deem it appropriate to direct the respondents to consider the applicant for notional promotion from the date his immediate junior i.e. Sri Bhagwan Dass was promoted and calculate the service of the applicant for pensionary benefits as per rules.
8. In view of the above, the O.A is disposed off. No costs MEMBER- A MEMBER- J Anand/ ??
??
??
??
5