HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - A No. - 4578 of 2025 Chief Justice's Court HON'BLE ARUN BHANSALI, CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE KSHITIJ SHAILENDRA, J. 1. This petition is directed against order dated 02.08.2024 passed by Central Administrative Tribunal, Allahabad Bench, Allahabad in O.A. No.1230 of 2019, whereby the original application filed by the respondent has been partly allowed, while issuing large number of directions in relation to the reliefs claimed in the O.A., the Tribunal directed grant of consequential benefits arising out of the outcome of the decision after complying with the directions given. 2. The respondent was appointed as Pointman on 12.11.1976 in Nagpur Division of Central Railway and was transferred to Jabalpur Division in the year 1980. While working as Pointman in Jabalpur Division, he remained unauthorisedly absent from duty from 01.02.1981 to 12.03.1981 and 15.02.1982 to 05.06.1983. For the said absence, he was issued a major penalty charge sheet and after holding inquiry, he was ordered to be removed from service by order dated 31.03.1984. 3. After lapse of 12 years, the respondent filed revision before General Manager, Central Railway, CST, Mumbai on 12.02.1996 and filed Original Application No.984 of 1996, wherein on 16.05.2001, direction was issued to the authorities to decide the revision filed by the respondent against the order dated 31.03.1984. The General Manager rejected the revision petition on 30.08.2001. O.A. No.43 of 2002 was filed against order dated 30.08.2001 which was disposed of on 19.08.2002, whereby orders dated 31.03.1984 and 30.08.2001 were set aside, granting liberty to the authority concerned to complete the inquiry within three months. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Shashi Prakash Singh (A.S.G.I.) with Purnendu Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : Union of India and 2 others .....Petitioner(s) Sudhanshu Vachaspati Tripathi and another .....Respondent(s) 4. The petitioners filed Writ Petition No.52322 of 2002, which was dismissed on 20.03.2007. On account of order dated 20.03.2007 whereby the writ petition was dismissed, the respondent was allowed posting and was posted as Assistant Pointman on 23.07.2007. The period from 15.04.1984 to 23.07.2007 was treated as dies non. 5. Again, O.A. No.777 of 2009 was filed, which was dismissed on 13.04.2010, which order was challenged before this Court by filing Writ Petition No.43945 of 2010 wherein directions were given for payment of subsistence allowance for the period 15.04.1984 to 23.07.2007. 6. Whereafter the present O.A. was filed seeking the following reliefs:- "(i) To issue an order or direction commanding the respondents to reinstate the applicant in scale of Rs. 200-250/- (corresponding to Rs. 2610-3540/-) as on 15.04.1984 when he was removed from service working in this pay scale and drawing salary amounting Rs. 208/- per month and again give promotional benefit in comparison wit his juniors. (ii) To issue an order or direction commanding the respondents to give benefit of ACP in scale of Rs. 800-1150/- and further he is entitled benefit of 2nd MACP in scale of Rs. 825-1200/- in pursuance of Railway Board's letters dated 01.10.1999 and 10.06.2009 with corresponding grade and grade pay with effect from 01.10.1999 and 01.09.2008 respectively. (iii) To issue an order or direction commanding the respondents to grant medical and pass facility as he had worked for more than 39 years. (iv) To issue an order or direction commanding the respondents to pay interest @ 12% on the amount due in pursuance of payment of subsistence allowance, revised pension and pensionary benefits including commutation value and other retiral dues. (v) To issue an order or direction commanding the respondents to give Provident Fund and amount of insurance since 12.11.1976 to 15.04.1984 to the applicant. (vi) To grant all the consequential relief which the applicant is entitled for. (vii) To grant any other relief which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case. (viii) To award the cost." 7. The Tribunal, after hearing the parties, passed the following order:- "19. In view of the above discussions, we pass the following orders:- (i) With respect ot relief no.(i) claimed by the applicant, the respondents are hereby directed to address the anomaly of pay WRIA No. 4578 of 2025 2 scale of the applicant at the time of his removal from service on 15.04.1984 supported firmly by official documents and records and treat the applicant as reinstated on 23.07.2007 on the pay scale he was actually drawing at the time of his removal from service on 15.04.1984 keeping in view the fact that even on request transfer, although seniority is forfeited, the pay has to be protected. (ii) With respect to relief no. (ii), the respondents are hereby directed to reconsider the period of suspension of the applicant between 15.04.1984 to 23.07.2007 in light of the DoPT OM No.11012/15/85-Estt (A) dated 03.12.1985 since the punishment finally imposed upon the applicant is a minor punishment and thus, the period of suspension of the applicant should be treated in light of the aforesaid OM. Having reconsidered the aforesaid period of suspension of the applicant in light of the OM No.11012/15/85-Estt (A) dated 03.12.1985, the respondents shall further consider the case of the applicant for grant of the benefit of ACP in scale of Rs. 800-1150/- and 2nd MACP in scale of Rs.825-1200/- in pursuance of Railway Board's letters dated 01.10.1999 and 10.06.2009 with corresponding grade and grade pay with effect from 01.10.1999 and 01.09.2008 respectively only if the applicant satisfies the conditions for the same as per the rules governing the matter. (iii) With respect to relief no. (iii), the respondents are directed to reconsider the case of the applicant for grant of medical and pass facility by counting the period of suspension for this purpose since finally there is an imposition of a minor penalty upon the applicant. (iv) So far as relief no. (iv) is concerned, the same is rejected for the reasons already discussed above in para 14 of this order. (v) Relief No. (v) is allowed and the respondents are directed to give Provident Fund and amount of insurance from 12.11.1976 to 15.04.1984 to the applicant. (vi) The aforesaid exercise including the payment of arrears of the amount accruing to the applicant as a result thereof should be completed within a period of five months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. 20. Thus, the O.A. stands partly allowed with the above directions and the respondents are also directed to grant the consequential service benefits arising out of the outcome of the decision after complying with the directions given in para 19 above. All associated M.A.s also stand disposed of. No order as to costs." 8. Counsel for the petitioners made submissions that a speaking order was passed by the Disciplinary Authority in compliance of judgement dated 20.03.2007 passed in Writ Petition No. 52322 of 2002 as well as judgement dated 19. 08.2002 passed by the Tribunal, wherein the liberty was granted to hold an inquiry from the stage of service of memo of WRIA No. 4578 of 2025 3 charge, wherein the penalty imposed earlier from removal of service was reduced to that of reduction in the initial stage in same time scale of pay for a period of three years with cumulative effect and it was specifically ordered that the intervening period from removal from service i.e. 15.04.1984 to that of resumption on duty i.e. 25.07.2007 shall be treated as "non duty" as he had not physically worked. 9. Submissions have been made that the said order of dies non was not disturbed at any stage and in view of provisions of Rule 37 of the Railways Services (Pension) Rules, 1993, the said period was not open to be counted as qualifying service and, therefore, the Tribunal was not justified in passing the order impugned. 10. We have considered the submissions made and have perused the material available on record. 11. A perusal of the order passed by the Tribunal, as quoted herein before, reveals that all the directions given pertain to consideration of anomaly of pay scale of the respondent, period of suspension of the respondent between 15.04.1984 to 23.07.2007 in the light of DoPT OM dated 03.12.1985 whereafter consider the case for grant of benefit of ACP and 2nd MACP, reconsider the case for grant of medical and pass facility. The Tribunal apparently has not decided any of the aspects and has only required determination. 12. In that view of the matter, the submissions made based on the order dated 13.05.2008 imposing the penalty and ordering for dies non and implication of Rule 37 of the Railways Services (Pension) Rules are premature. The petitioners essentially are yet to pass orders in accordance with law and in case the Rule has any application in the circumstances of the case and various orders passed from time to time by the Tribunal and this Court, it is for the petitioners to pass order in accordance with law. Seeking an advance ruling in the name of questioning the validity of the order passed directing reconsideration cannot be countenanced and, therefore, the present writ petition on the said count cannot be entertained. 13. The petition is, therefore, disposed of with the above observations. September 23, 2025 SL WRIA No. 4578 of 2025 4 (Kshitij Shailendra,J.) (Arun Bhansali,CJ.) Digitally signed by :- SHYAM LAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad