Central Administrative Tribunal - Mumbai
Ravishankar Pal And Ors vs Central Railway on 17 December, 2025
1 OA.2128/2019
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,
MUMBAI BENCH,
CAMP AT NAGPUR
O.A.2128/2019
Dated this Wednesday the 17th day of December, 2025.
Coram: Hon'ble Mr.Shri Krishna, Member (Administrative)
Hon'ble Mr.Umesh Gajankush, Member (Judicial).
1. Ravishankar Pal, aged 32 years
2. Sunil Kumar, aged 33 years
3. Jitendra Kumar Sahu, aged 38 years
4. Saju Mahto, aged 34 years
5. Sandeep Kumar, aged 30 years
All the applicants named above are medically
De-categorized running staff of Central Railway,
Nagpur, C/o. Shri Ravishankar Pal, R/o., Qtr. No.411/A,
RB-II, Central Railway Colony, Ajni,
Nagpur - 440 003. .. Applicant.
( By Advocate Shri B. Lahiri ).
Versus
1. Union of India, through
The General Manager,
Central Railway, CST Mumbai-400 001.
2. Divisional Railway Manager (P),
Central Railway, Kingway, Nagpur - 440 001.
Milan Jackson
Digitally signed by Milan Jackson Alphanso
DN: C=IN, O=Personal, OID.2.5.4.65=
0815a10efc18484c96f92d4cf96b158b, Phone=
30f7d919c844ed7f75e7bc56633df96108338768adae5582338f0d13
d4f0f1dc, PostalCode=401203, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER=
6b7c9269fe100118bd94c76380691e4802b189a40578bdd0fd757c8
b8babf6f4, CN=Milan Jackson Alphanso
3. Sr. Divisional Personnel Officer,
Alphanso
Central Railway, Kingsway,
Reason: I am the author of this document
Location:
Date: 2025.12.18 15:55:55+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.4.0
Nagpur - 440 001. .. Respondents.
( By Advocate Shri S.R. Charpe ).
Order reserved on : 26.11.2025
Order pronounced on : 17.12.2025.
2 OA.2128/2019
ORDER
Per : Umesh Gajankush, Member (J)
The applicants have filed this O.A. under Section 19 of the AT Act, 1985 for seeking the following reliefs:
"(a) Quash and set aside the impugned speaking order communicated by letter dated 14.03.2019 issued by respondent no.3 (Annex.A1) and in the same order direct the respondents to fix the pay of the applicants on the date of their absorption in alternate post in terms of Railway Board's order dated 30.04.2013 as illustrated in Annexure-
I thereto (Annex.A7) with all consequential benefits flowing there from;
(b) Declare that the case of the applicants is fully covered by Hon'ble CAT, Principal Bench order in OA No.2235/2012 in the matter of Ranbir Kumar v. Union of India (Annex. A16).
(c) Grant any other relief deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case including costs."
2. Brief facts of the case are that the applicants were appointed through Railway Recruitment Board on the post of Assistant Loco Pilot (ALP) in Pay Band of Rs.5200-20200 + Grade Pay of Rs.1900/- and thereafter promoted on the post of Milan Jackson Digitally signed by Milan Jackson Alphanso DN: C=IN, O=Personal, OID.2.5.4.65= 0815a10efc18484c96f92d4cf96b158b, Phone= 30f7d919c844ed7f75e7bc56633df96108338768adae5582338f0d13 d4f0f1dc, PostalCode=401203, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 6b7c9269fe100118bd94c76380691e4802b189a40578bdd0fd757c8 b8babf6f4, CN=Milan Jackson Alphanso Sr. ALP in Pay Band of Rs.5200-20200 + Grade Pay of Rs.2400/- Alphanso Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.12.18 15:55:55+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.4.0 While working on the post of Sr. ALP, the applicants were medically decategorized from the post of Sr. ALP but suitable for alternative post were issued on 24.11.2015, 28.10.2015, 3 OA.2128/2019 23.12.2015, 17.12.2015 and 16.12.2015 respectively.
Subsequently, they were absorbed in the alternative category of Technician (FTR)-II vide order dated 24.06.2016 and posted in TRS Section, Ajni vide posting order dated 20.07.2016, 16.08.2016 and 25.01.2017.
2.1. It is the case of the applicants that as per order passed by the CAT, Ernakulam Bench they cannot be deprived of service benefits which they would have enjoyed had they not acquired the disability. However, without taking into consideration the Railway Board Circular and the order of the Ernakulam Bench, the respondents have regularized their pay fixation. Therefore, the O.A.2182/2018 was filed before this Tribunal which was disposed of vide order dated 30.10.2017. However, by impugned communication dated 14.03.2019, the representation of the applicants was turned down holding that the respondents have correctly fixed the pay of the applicants as on 01.01.2016. Digitally signed by Milan Jackson Alphanso 2.2. The aforesaid order is under challenge principally on the DN: C=IN, O=Personal, OID.2.5.4.65= Milan Jackson 0815a10efc18484c96f92d4cf96b158b, Phone= 30f7d919c844ed7f75e7bc56633df96108338768adae5582338f0d13 d4f0f1dc, PostalCode=401203, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 6b7c9269fe100118bd94c76380691e4802b189a40578bdd0fd757c8 b8babf6f4, CN=Milan Jackson Alphanso Alphanso Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.12.18 15:55:55+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.4.0 ground that the respondents themselves have formulated rules relating to fixation of pay of medically decategorized running staff 4 OA.2128/2019 as well as granting protection of pay to Railway employee who has acquired disability while in service in tune with PWD Act and, therefore, according to the applicants their pay was required to be fixed on Pay Matrix of Rs.76,500/- instead of Rs.64,100/-.
3. After notice, the official respondents have filed their reply and contested the O.A. 3.1. It is stated that the applicants were declared unfit for the post of Sr. Assistant Loco Pilot on 24.11.2015, 28.10.2015, 23.12.2015, 17.12.2015 and 16.12.2015 respectively i.e. much before implementation of 7th Pay Commission and thus, cease to be Sr. Assistant Loco Pilot from that date. Therefore, their pay were fixed as per Railway Board's letter dated 30.04.2013 (RBE No.41/2013) which is applicable for the pay fixation of medically decategorized staff.
3.2. It is further submitted that Railway Board also clarified vide letter dated 05.10.2011 (Annex-A-5) that the pay of medically Digitally signed by Milan Jackson Alphanso DN: C=IN, O=Personal, OID.2.5.4.65= Milan Jackson 0815a10efc18484c96f92d4cf96b158b, Phone= 30f7d919c844ed7f75e7bc56633df96108338768adae5582338f0d13 d4f0f1dc, PostalCode=401203, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 6b7c9269fe100118bd94c76380691e4802b189a40578bdd0fd757c8 b8babf6f4, CN=Milan Jackson Alphanso Alphanso decategorized running staff is to be fixed by adding the pay Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.12.18 15:55:55+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.4.0 element of running allowance as may be in force from the date they are declared medically unfit till the date they are absorbed 5 OA.2128/2019 in suitable posts, needs to be suitably i.e. while kept on supernumerary post. Therefore, the pay fixed after decategorization i.e. on 24.11.2015, 28.10.2015, 23.12.2015, 17.12.2015 and 16.12.2015 does not warrant rectification on implementation of 7th Pay Commission.
3.3. It is submitted that Railway Board letter dated 25.04.2011, RBE No.53/2011 (Annex-A-6) is specifically applicable for promotion / selection to Group 'B' post. Hence, the same cannot be applied for pay-fixation on medical decategorization. It is categorically denied that the applicants' cases are covered by the judgment dated 04.09.2015. It is also submitted that the applicant in the cited matter was selected for the post of Loco Pilot (Goods) in the pay scale of Rs.9300-34800/- in the Grade Pay of Rs.4200/- and also successfully completed the training for the said post and thereafter on medical examination he was declared medically decategorized for the post of Loco Pilot Milan Jackson Digitally signed by Milan Jackson Alphanso DN: C=IN, O=Personal, OID.2.5.4.65= 0815a10efc18484c96f92d4cf96b158b, Phone= 30f7d919c844ed7f75e7bc56633df96108338768adae5582338f0d13 d4f0f1dc, PostalCode=401203, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 6b7c9269fe100118bd94c76380691e4802b189a40578bdd0fd757c8 b8babf6f4, CN=Milan Jackson Alphanso (Goods) on 03.02.2011. The applicants pay have been rightly Alphanso Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.12.18 15:55:55+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.4.0 fixed as per Railway Board's letter dated 30.04.2013 RBE No.41/2013, applicable for fixation of the pay of medically unfit running staff in alternative (Stationary) post.6 OA.2128/2019
3.4. It is further submitted that the present applicants cases are not covered by the CAT, Ernakulam Bench order dated 01.10.2014. The applicant in the said case while working as Loco Pilot (Mail) was declared medically unfit and was kept on supernumerary post pending granting alternative post and fixed his pay by adding 30% of pay-element of running allowance. The said applicant instead of accepting the alternative post opted for provision of Rule 17(ii) of Railway Service (Pension) Rules, 1993 and chooses voluntary retirement with effect from 01.12.2012.
Whereas, the present applicants accepted the alternate posts. The fixation of pay of medically decategorized running staff for the period from the date they are declared unfit till their final absorption in alternative appointment i.e. the period during which they kept on supernumerary post for want of suitable alternative post is clarified in RBE No.138/2011 dated 05.10.2011. Therefore, the facts of both the matters are altogether different Digitally signed by Milan Jackson Alphanso DN: C=IN, O=Personal, OID.2.5.4.65= and also the applicable rules are also different. Milan Jackson 0815a10efc18484c96f92d4cf96b158b, Phone= 30f7d919c844ed7f75e7bc56633df96108338768adae5582338f0d13 d4f0f1dc, PostalCode=401203, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 6b7c9269fe100118bd94c76380691e4802b189a40578bdd0fd757c8 b8babf6f4, CN=Milan Jackson Alphanso Alphanso Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.12.18 15:55:55+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.4.0
4. Thereafter a Pursis was filed by the applicants on 12.02.2025.
7 OA.2128/2019
5. We have heard Shri B. Lahiri, learned counsel for the applicants and Shri S.R. Charpe, learned counsel for the respondents.
6. The principle issue is under consideration, whether after decategorization of the employee from Running Staff he can be denied the benefit of Running Staff till the new posting keeping in view the provisions of PWD Act was considered by CAT, Ernakulam Bench in its order dated 01.10.2014 in O.A.180/00272/2014 in case of K.S. GopalaKrishnan Vs. Union of India & Others, the relevant paras 13,14, and 15 of the said order are reproduced herein below:-
"13. A reading of the above provision of law makes it clear that if an employee after acquiring disability is not suitable for the post he was holding, he could be shifted to some other post with the same pay scale and service benefits. In the instant case soon after the applicant was medically decategorized, he was posted on a supernumerary post pending absorption into a suitable alternative employment. The rules in the Railway do enable the employee to be given an alternative employment in the case of medical Digitally signed by Milan Jackson Alphanso decategorization. Nevertheless, if the medical decategorization is on account of a "disability" which was DN: C=IN, O=Personal, OID.2.5.4.65= Milan Jackson 0815a10efc18484c96f92d4cf96b158b, Phone= 30f7d919c844ed7f75e7bc56633df96108338768adae5582338f0d13 d4f0f1dc, PostalCode=401203, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 6b7c9269fe100118bd94c76380691e4802b189a40578bdd0fd757c8 b8babf6f4, CN=Milan Jackson Alphanso Alphanso Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.12.18 15:55:55+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.4.0 acquired while in service, the mandatory provisions of Section 47 of PWD Act, 1995 has to be followed. Though this position was not argued by either side, being a pure question of law, this tribunal is obliged to invoke and apply the law in appropriate cases. Hon. Apex court in Kunal Singh v. Union of India and Anr. (2003) 4 SCC 524 has 8 OA.2128/2019 opted the same judicial technique to provide relief to a policeman, whose left leg was amputated on account of gangrene, was invalidated by authorities. This Tribunal feels that the mandatory provisions of PWD Act have supervening effect on the Pension Rules and the ancillary Railway Board instructions relating to the medically declassified railway servants. Therefore, this Tribunal is of the view that in the light of Section 47 of the PWD Act, applicant could not be reduced in rank but could be shifted to some other post with the same pay scale and service benefits or could be kept on a supernumerary post until a suitable post was available or he attained the age of superannuation.
14. In this O.A. applicant was admittedly decategorized on 22.9.2012 as he was found unfit in 'Aye-one' category.
Under Section 47 of the PWD Act, he could be kept on a supernumerary post or some other post without reduction in rank and service benefits. What Section 47 protects is the rank, pay and the service conditions the employee, who had acquired disability during service, enjoyed prior to this acquiring the disability. Therefore, this Tribunal is of the view that any Railway Board instructions per contra will be of no effect in view of the mandatory provisions of Section 47 of the PWD Act. Therefore, it goes without saying that the contention of the Railways that soon after his medical declassification on 2.9.2012 applicant cannot be treated as Loco Pilot (Mail) and cannot be given the benefits enjoyable by him, had he not acquired the disability of low vision is untenable. Therefore, though the application for voluntary retirement and its acceptance by the Railways Digitally signed by Milan Jackson Alphanso took place after medical decategorization, so long as the applicant was on supernumerary post he could not be DN: C=IN, O=Personal, OID.2.5.4.65= Milan Jackson 0815a10efc18484c96f92d4cf96b158b, Phone= 30f7d919c844ed7f75e7bc56633df96108338768adae5582338f0d13 d4f0f1dc, PostalCode=401203, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 6b7c9269fe100118bd94c76380691e4802b189a40578bdd0fd757c8 b8babf6f4, CN=Milan Jackson Alphanso Alphanso Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.12.18 15:55:55+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.4.0 deprived of the service benefits he would have enjoyed had he not acquired the disability of low vision during his service.
15. Therefore, this Tribunal is not inclined to accept the contention of the respondents Railway. The respondents 9 OA.2128/2019 are directed to consider the case of the applicant as if he was a serving Loco Pilot (Mail) with all available service benefits including 55% basic pay to be reckoned as running allowance for the purpose of calculation of his pay for the pension. Respondents shall consider refixing of his pension in the light of the law as stated above in this order.
This exercise shall be completed within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Ordered accordingly. No order as to costs."
7. The aforesaid order was passed keeping in view the proposition of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kunal Sing Vs. Union of India & Others, reported in (2003) 4 SCC 524. In the present case looking to the impugned order dated 14.03.2016, it is clear that the respondents have justified their action of fixation as on 01.01.2016 on the basis of Railway Board letters. The aforesaid aspect has been considered in case of K.S. GopalaKrishnan (supra).
8. The aforesaid order of the Ernakulam Bench was passed taking into account the provisions of PWD Act, 1995, which has been replaced by "The Rights of Persons With Disabilities Act, Milan Jackson Digitally signed by Milan Jackson Alphanso DN: C=IN, O=Personal, OID.2.5.4.65= 0815a10efc18484c96f92d4cf96b158b, Phone= 30f7d919c844ed7f75e7bc56633df96108338768adae5582338f0d13 d4f0f1dc, PostalCode=401203, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 6b7c9269fe100118bd94c76380691e4802b189a40578bdd0fd757c8 b8babf6f4, CN=Milan Jackson Alphanso 2016", which was required to be considered by the respondents Alphanso Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.12.18 15:55:55+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.4.0 in case of each of the applicants.
9. Under these circumstances, the O.A. is allowed. The impugned order dated 14.03.2016 is liable to be set aside and is 10 OA.2128/2019 hereby set aside. The respondents are directed to reconsider the case of each of the applicants taking into account their disability as per the observations made above and pass appropriate order in accordance with law within a period of 120 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. The O.A. is allowed to the extent indicated above.
10. There will be no order as to costs. Pending MAs, if any, also stand disposed of.
(Umesh Gajankush) (Shri Krishna)
Member (J) Member (A).
H
Digitally signed by Milan Jackson Alphanso
DN: C=IN, O=Personal, OID.2.5.4.65=
Milan Jackson 0815a10efc18484c96f92d4cf96b158b, Phone= 30f7d919c844ed7f75e7bc56633df96108338768adae5582338f0d13 d4f0f1dc, PostalCode=401203, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 6b7c9269fe100118bd94c76380691e4802b189a40578bdd0fd757c8 b8babf6f4, CN=Milan Jackson Alphanso Alphanso Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.12.18 15:55:55+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.4.0