Kerala High Court
Union Of India vs M. Prabhakaran Nambisan on 1 February, 2024
Author: A. Muhamed Mustaque
Bench: A.Muhamed Mustaque
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN
THURSDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 / 12TH MAGHA, 1945
OP (CAT) NO. 7 OF 2024
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT OA 379/2021 OF CENTRAL
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,ERNAKULAM BENCH
PETITIONERS/APPLICANTS IN OA:
1 UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE GENERAL
MANAGER, SOUTHEN RAILWAY, HEADQUARTERS OFFICE,
PARK TOWN.P.O., CHENNAI, PIN - 600 003
2 THE SENIOR DIVISIONAL PERSONNEL OFFICER
SOUTHERN RAILWAY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DIVISION,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695 014
3 THE SENIOR DIVISIONAL FINANCE MANAGER
SOUTHERN RAILWAY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DIVISION,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695 014
BY ADV SHRI.K.SHRI HARI RAO, CGC
RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT IN OA:
M. PRABHAKARAN NAMBISAN, AGED 76 YEARS, S/O.
P.V. KRISHNAN UNNI ALIAS E.V. KRISHNAN NAMBISAN,
(RETD. SERVER, VEGETARIAN REFRESHMENT
ROOM,SOUTHERN RAILWAY, ERNAKULAM JUNCTION),
RESIDING AT PARAKKET HOUSE, KALLUR, MATTANNUR,
PORORA.P.O., KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN - 670 702
THIS OP (CAT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
01.02.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
O.P (CAT)No.7 of 2024
..2..
JUDGMENT
A. Muhamed Mustaque, J.
The Union Government and the officials of Southern
Railways are the petitioners before us. They challenge the
order of the Central Administrative Tribunal allowing the
respondent to claim arrears of pension from 2007 to 2015 and
also directing the petitioners to give the benefit of Assured
Career Progression Scheme (for short "ACP Scheme") based
on 12 years of service in the Railways.
2. The respondents entered appearance.
3. We are now disposing of this matter at the
admission stage itself. We had the advantage of hearing the
learned Central Government Counsel as well as Adv. Smt.
Kala, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent.
4. The facts involved in this case are as follows:
5. The respondent initially joined in the service of
railways in the year 1973. Then he appears to have not
reported to duty. Thereafter, he rendered his service as a
..3..
Commission Bearer from 22.01.1982 to 01.07.2000.
Thereafter, he was regularised in the service w.e.f 2.07.2000
as a Server of the Departmental Vegetarian Refreshment
Room, Southern Railways. He retired from the service on
31.12.2006.
6. The respondent approached the tribunal as he was
not granted pension. The tribunal directed the Railways to
consider his representation. Thereafter, Railways considered
his representation and granted pension reckoning his service
from 1982. However, disbursement of pension was restricted
from 2007 to 2015.
7. The respondent/applicant again approached the
tribunal for arrears of pension w.e.f 01.01.2007 onwards till
2015. This has been allowed. Apart from that, his claim for
ACP benefits also has been allowed.
8. The learned Central Government Counsel submits
that the reason for restriction for granting pension w.e.f 2014
was that the respondent approached the tribunal only in the
year 2017. It is submitted that the Apex Court in Union of
India and Another v. Tarsem Singh [2008 (8) SCC 648],
held that allowing the claim for arrears of pension within
..4..
three years prior to the date of filing of the original petition is
barred by the Principles of Limitation.
9. We note that this is not a case where the tribunal
had ordered for payment of pension. Here, the Railways
themselves decided to grant pension. In such circumstances,
we are of the view that the Railways could not have restricted
payment of pension from 2015 onwards. No doubt, the
respondent/applicant cannot claim any interest for the
delayed payment of pension as he was at fault in not claiming
pension through the intervention of the tribunal or the Court
from the date of cause of action arose to him. But
nevertheless, we note that the respondent belongs to a lower
category and we cannot remain oblivious to the circumstances
of such person in approaching the Court or tribunal on time.
In such circumstances, we are of the view that the tribunal
was justified in ordering arrears of pension from 2007
onwards. However, we see that a person cannot claim ACP
benefits long after his retirement from service. The ACP
benefits itself has been raised for the first time, in the
present original petition in the year 2021. For granting ACP
benefits, many factors will have to be taken into account, i.e.,
..5..
the nature of service, qualification etc. Such a claim cannot
be now taken up after a long lapse of period. Further, we
note that there is no specific prayer in the application filed
before the tribunal for relief based on ACP scheme.
10. Anyway, we are not inclined to allow the claim
based on ACP scheme. Accordingly, the impugned order is
modified to the extent of interfering with the ACP benefits
granted to the respondent. The arrears shall be paid within a
period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this
judgment.
This original petition is disposed of as above.
Sd/-
A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE
JUDGE
Sd/-
SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN
JUDGE
PR
..6..
APPENDIX OF OP (CAT) 7/2024
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure A1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED
31.01.2019 IN O.A. NO. 782/2017 OF THE
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,
ERNAKULAM BENCH
Annexure A2 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM BEARING
NO. V/P 353/2016/CATERING/COMM.
BEARER/VOL.II DATED 17.12.2019 ISSUED
BY THE 2ND PETITIONER HEREIN
Annexure A3 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION NO.
CPPC TRIVANDRUM CPPC/2014/DATED
6.11.2000 FORWADING THE RESPONDENT
HEREIN PPO TO THE MATTANNUR BRANCH OF
SBI ISSUED BY THE SCI/CPPC, TRIVANDRUM
Annexure A4 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED
2.2.2021, SUBMITTED BY THE RESPONDENT
HEREIN ADDRESSED TO THE 2ND PETITIONER
HEREIN
Annexure R1 TRUE COPY OF PENSION PAYMENT ORDER
NO.20207060400324 DATED 6.10.2020
Annexure R2 TRUE COPY OF THE PENSION PAYMENT ORDER
NUMBER 20067060400376 DATED 5.8.2022
Annexure R3 TRUE COPY OF HON'BLE SUPREME COURT'S
DECISION IN (2008) 8 SCC 648, UNION OF
INDIA V. TARSEM SINGH
Annexure R4 TRUE COPY OF HON'BLE SUPREME COURT'S
DECISION IN (1988) SCC 437,
T.I.MADHAVAN AND ORS V. UNION OF INDIA
& ORS
Annexure R5 TRUE COPY OF HON'BLE SUPREME COURT'S
DECISION IN (1998) 9 SCC 252, UNION OF
..7..
INDIA V. K.V.BABY
Annexure R6 TRUE COPY OF RBE NO.233/1999 DATED
1.10.1999
Annexure R7 TRUE COPY OF RULE 20, CHAPTER III OF
RAILWAY SERVICE PENSION RULES, 1993
Annexure R8 TRUE COPY OF RULE 24(1), CHAPTER III
OF RAILWAY SERVICE PENSION RULES, 1993
Annexure A5 TRUE COPY OF THE RAILWAY BOARD ORDERS
BEARING NO.69/2004 DATED 31.3.2004
Exhibit P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE OA NO.
180/0037912021 DATED 03.08.2021 FILED
BY THE RESPONDENT HEREIN
Exhibit P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY STATEMENT
DATED 16.09.2022 IN OA NO.
180/379/2021 FILED BY THE PETITIONERS
HEREIN BEFORE THE CAT, ERNAKULAM BENCH
Exhibit P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REJOINDER DATED
30.09.2022 IN OA NO.180/379/2021 FILED
BY THE RESPONDENT HEREIN BEFORE THE
CAT, ERNAKULAM BENCH
Exhibit P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED
21.06.2023 IN OA NO.180/379/2021
PASSED BY THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE
TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM BENCH
