Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE EASWARAN S. WEDNESDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF JUNE 2024 / 5TH ASHADHA, 1946 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 31.05.2023 IN OA NO.288 OF 2016 OF CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM BENCH PETITIONER(S)/RESPONDENTS IN O.A.: 1 UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY CHIEF PERSONEL OFFICER, SOUTHERN RAILWAY, CHENNAI, TAMILNADU, PIN - 600003 2 SENIOR DIVISIONAL PERSONEL OFFICER, SOUTHERN RAILWAY, MADURAI DIVISION, MADURAI, TAMILNADU, PIN - 625016 BY ADV SHRI.K.SHRI HARI RAO, CGC RESPONDENT(S)APPLICANT IN O.A.: G.ABRAHAM, SENIOR TRACK MAN (RTD), SOUTHERN RAILWAY, CHENILAHIKATHUPUTHEN VEEDU, AVANEESWARAM R.S.P.O., QUILON, PIN - 691508 THIS OP (CAT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26.06.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
AMIT RAWAL, J.
1. The present OP(CAT) at the instance of Union of India and Others is directed against the order dated 31.04.2023 of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) whereby various OAs including the OA in question, O.A.No.288/2016, was disposed of in consolidated manner.
2. The grievance of the respondent-applicant before the CAT in brief was that he commenced service in the
railway on 22.06.1971 as Khalasi and was accorded temporary status on 15.08.1978. Services were regularised with effect from 07.02.1988 and later on retired as Senior Track Man from Southern Railway on 30.06.2013. The grievance agitated was that since 22.06.1971, service was not reckoned for estimating pension and therefore sought the indulgence of the Tribunal to re-determine the pension by taking into account 50% of his casual service with effect from 22.06.1971 to 15.08.1978 and entire service from
15.08.1978 till the date of retirement. The claim aforementioned was denied on the premise that the engagement by the Railway was with effect from 22.06.1971 but was granted temporary status on 15.09.1978 after having completed four months of
continuous service of the same type of work and thus, qualified in the scale of 196-232 which was revised from time to time. In support, relied on Ext.R1, page 3 of service
book. The Railway Board circular dated 14.10.1980 permitted 50% of casual service only for pensionary benefit if it is followed by regular employment. But the applicant attained the temporary service from 15.09.1978. Thus 50% of the casual service from 15.09.1978 to 07.02.1988 was taken along with regular service for arriving at his qualifying service for the purpose of calculation of pensionary benefits and payment was settled as per the circular ibid vide Ext.R2. If 100% qualified service is taken into account as claimed, the applicant would be entitled to additional payment of gratuity and being one time payment, the claim would be
barred by limitation in view of the retirement in the year 2013.
3. Learned Tribunal noticing in paragraph 6 of the
order that the respondent-applicant though claimed 50% of
his period of engagement from 22.06.1971 till the date of granting of temporary status on 15.08.1978 as reckonable for pension, but no document was placed on record that he had rendered continues and uninterrupted service from 22.06.1971, allowed OA on the ground that applicant had put in four(4) months of continuous service prior to the granting of temporary status and 50% of that period is also to be reckoned for estimating qualifying service for fixation of pension and direction was issued to respondents therein to reckon 50% of four(4) months of service put up by the
applicant as casual labourer prior to grant of temporary status of 15.09.1978.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner Union of India submitted that relief granted providing four(4) months in the impugned order of the
Tribunal was never claimed by the applicant and in case that period is claimed, his total service would increase to 30.5 years by rounding off instead of 30 years which will have a wide ramification.
5. On the other hand, there is no representation on behalf of respondent despite service of notice on 1.2.2024, as per the report dated 30.05.2024.
6. Before we could give our reasons, in the previous
order on 30.05.2024 there was no appearance, but we
adjourned the matter with a hope that somebody would appear but there is again no representation. Accordingly we decide the matter.
7. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and appraised the paper book.
8. The operative part of the direction contained in the order of the CAT reads as well as the prayer claimed in the OA read as under:
8. Even when there is no representation for the applicant, in the light of the admitted position that he had put in four
months of continuous service prior to grant of temporary status as well, 50% of that period also is to be reckoned for estimating qualifying service for fixing pension. Therefore, the O.A is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to reckon 50% of four months service put in by him as casual labourer prior to grant of temporary status on 15.9.1978 also to his qualifying service and pension shall be re-worked accordingly. This shall be done and arrears shall be drawn and disbursed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Prayers a) To direct the respondents to re-determine the pension by taking into account 50% of his casual service with effect from 22/6/1971 10 15/8/1978 and 100% from other consequential benefits. AND b) To declare that service of the applicant from 22/6/1971 shall be reckoned for pension and other benefits including gratuity and grade pay, c) Grant such further and other reliefs as the nature and circumstance of the case may require.
9. It is conceded position on record that the
instruction 1980, though, entitles the employee to have the benefit of pension from the date he takes charge to the post to which his first appointment either substantive or in the official or temporary capacity, in the instant case, acquired temporary status from 15.09.1978. Therefore, only 50% of casual service from 15.09.1978 to 07.02.1988 is to be taken along with regular service for the purpose of arriving his qualifying service and also for calculation of pensionary benefits which was settled as per Ext.R2 guidelines.
10. The direction in paragraph 8 of the order of the CAT, in our view, is not sustainable, as his qualifying service
would be increased to 30.5 instead of 30 years. Thus, we modify the order under challenge directing that four(4) months of period prior to 15.09.1978 shall not be considered for the purpose of qualifying service for pension. Rest of the
order is upheld. OP(CAT stands disposed off.
Sd/- AMIT RAWAL JUDGE Sd/- EASWARAN S. JUDGE nak APPENDIX OF OP (CAT) 8/2024 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A1 TRUE COPY OF THE SERVICE CARD DATED 30.06.2013 OF THE RESPONDENT HEREIN Annexure R1 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE SERVICE REGISTER OF THE RESPONDENT HEREIN DATED NIL Annexure R2 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE RAILWAY BOARD CIRCULAR NO.E(NG)II/78/CL/12 DATED 14.10.1980 Exhibit P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE OA NO. 288/16 DATED 21.3.2016 ON THE FILE OF THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM BENCH Exhibit P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY STATEMENT DATED 15.6.2016 FILED BY THE PETITIONERS HEREIN BEFORE THE CAT, ERNAKULAM BENCH IN OA NO. 288/2016 Exhibit P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER DATED 26.10.2016 IN OANO. 288/2016 PASSED BY THE CAT, ERNAKULAM BENCH. Exhibit P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REVIEW APPLICATION DATED 09.12.2016 IN RA NO. 11/2017 IN OA NO. 288/2016 OF THE CAT, EMAKULAM BENCH Exhibit P5 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY STATEMENT
FILED BY THE PETITIONERS HEREIN BEFORE THE CAT, EMAKULAM BENCH IN RA NO. 11/17 IN OA NO. 288/2016 DATED 13.02.2017
Exhibit P6 THE TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER IN RA NO. 11/17 AND CONNECTED CASES DATED 13.3.2017 PASSED BY THE CAT, ERNAKULAM BENCH Exhibit P7 THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 19.12.2017 IN OP(CAT) NO. 351/2017 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT Exhibit P8 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 31.5.2023 IN OA NO. 288/2016 PASSED BY THE CAT, ERNAKULAM BENCH