IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.3356 of 2011 1. THE UNION OF INDIA THROUGH THE CHAIRMAN, RAILWAY BOARD, RAIL BHAVAN, NEW DELHI 2. THE GENERALMANAGER, E.C. RAILWAY, HAJIPUR 3. DIVISIONAL RAILWAY MANAGER, SONEPUR, E.C. RAILWAY, HAJIPUR 4. DIVISIONAL ACCOUNTS OFFICER, SONEPUR, E.C. RAILWAY, HAJIPUR ……………….RESPONDENTS/APPELLANTS Versus NAND KUMAR SINGH SON OF LATE FAUDAR SINGH, R/O VILLAGE- KIUL, GARHARA, P.S.- BARAUNI, DISTRICT-BEGUSARAI ……………PETITIONER/RESPONDENT ----------- 2 10/03/2011 This writ application has been filed against the order dated 30.11.2009 passed in O.A. No. 100 of 2008/M.A. 298 of 2009 by which the appellants- respondents were directed to re-fix the pension and gratuity of the respondent-petitioner after taking into account the whole period of service i.e. 27 years, 10 months and 13 days as qualifying service within three months with interest for the whole amount at the rate admissible under Rule 87 on delayed payment of gratuity. The main claim of the respondent-petitioner was that he was appointed as Substitute on 15.4.1974 in the Railway Service and he was in continuous service without break and was absorbed in regular Group ‘D’ post. He retired on 28.2.2002 from the post of Carriage Fitter. In Rule 32 of the Railway Service (Pension) Rules (hereinafter referred to as the Rules) it was indicated that the services rendered as substitute shall be counted for pensionary 2 benefits from the date of completion of four months of continuous service as substitute followed by absorption in a regular Group ‘D’ post. Appellants-respondents have calculated his retrial dues, counting half the period from temporary status i.e. 11.8.1974 to the date of regularization i.e. 13.3.1989 and full period from 13.3.1989 to 28.2.2002 as per Rule 409 (2) of MRP 1950 and Rule 31 of the Rules. Aggrieved by the same the respondent-petitioner has filed O.A. No. 100 of 2008 before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal) claiming the benefits under Rule 32 of the Rules stating that his services has to be counted as substitute from 15.4.1974 onwards which would come to be 27 years, 10 months and 13 days. The said fact has been denied in the written statement filed before the Tribunal by the appellants-respondents. After hearing both the parties, the Tribunal was of the opinion that the respondent-petitioner is entitled to get his revised pension and gratuity in the light of Rule 32 of the Rules and has directed to make payment. Aggrieved by the same the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Railways has contended before us that the respondent-petitioner has worked as substitute in temporary status and his services was regularized with 3 effect from 13.3.1989 and thus his retiral dues were paid, counting half the period before regularization i.e. on 13.3.1989 and full period after 13.3.1989 till 28.2.2002. But Rule 32 of the Railway Service (Pension) Rules, 1993 provides that the service of the substitute will count for pensionary benefits from the date of completion of four months (three months in the case of teacher) of continuous service provided it is followed by absorption in regular Group ‘C’/ ‘D’ without break. In this case, it is admitted fact that the respondent-petitioner has worked as a substitute without any break and he has already been absorbed in Group ‘D’ post which was not denied by the appellants herein or before the Tribunal. In view of the above facts, we hold that the Tribunal was perfectly right in allowing the O. A. No. 100 of 2008 and has given cogent reasons. We find no irregularity or illegality in the impugned order and it needs no interference of this Court. Accordingly, this writ application is dismissed. There shall be no order as to cost. (T. Meena Kumari, J.) (Shyam Kishore Sharma, J.) avin