Munindra Nath Rai, S/o Late Shiv Kumar Rai vs Union Of India, Through The General Manager, Northern Railway, Head Quarter, Baroda House, New Delhi-1 & Ors.

Mohan Pyare, Member (A)

Shri Shiv Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant.

Shri M.K. Sharma, learned counsel for the respondents.

This execution application has been filed for execution of the order of this Tribunal passed in OA No.1201 of 2008- M.N. Rai, Vs Union of India and Others. The operative portion of the order in above referred OA is reproduced below:-

“22. In view of the discussions above, the OA is allowed in part and the respondents are directed to consider the case of the applicant for promotion to the scale of Rs.2000-3200/- w.e.f. 20.12.1992 on proforma basis at par with his juniors like Sri V.N. Mishra who were allowed such promotion on proforma basis w.e.f. 20.12.1992 (when the applicant was in service) during selection in 2001 based on the modified procedure for selection. Further, if the applicant is found fit for such selection/promotion as per the rules, then he shall be allowed the benefits, including differential retirement benefits, permissible as per the rules applicable for proforma promotion at par with the benefits allowed to the applicant’s juniors like Shri V.N. Mishra for the proforma promotion from 20.12.1992. But no arrear pay shall be allowed as he had not shouldered higher responsibility linked to the promotional post. The order shall be complied within six months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.”

According to applicant, the order of this Tribunal in above referred OA dated 30.08.2018 was communicated to concerned respondents for compliance and even after completion of six months, respondents have not complied the said order. After expiry of the period of six months ADRM Northern Railway, Varanasi issued a letter dated 03.05.2019 who is not a party in the above aforesaid original application, rejecting the claim of the applicant.

Per contra respondents have submitted that the party who has been impleaded in the capacity of General Manager Northern Railway, Headquarters Baroda House New Delhi is not correct and the correct description of the party would be the General Manager (Personnel) who is Chief (Personnel) Officer, Northern Railway. The contention of the applicant is that the order passed in compliance of order of this Tribunal dated 30.08.2018 is by a non-competent authority, is not correct. The respondent no.4 is looking after the function of respondent no.3 i.e. CCM (Claims)/Dy. Chief Commercial Manager (Claims), Northern Railway, Station Building, Varanasi Cantonment and as such allegation of incompetency of respondent no.4 is not correct. The competent authority has rejected the claim of the applicant and the execution application would not be maintainable as well as the contempt is also not maintainable. After passing the order by competent authority only a fresh cause of action is available to applicant. The averments which are required to be made in a contempt petition have been made in present execution application, cleverly omitting to refer that execution in the present facts of the case is not maintainable. The present execution application is neither maintainable not any violation has been made by the respondents. A careful reading of the order of this Tribunal in the referred OA shows that respondents were directed to consider the case of applicant and if the applicant was found fit for such selection/promotion as per rules then only he shall be allowed the benefit including differential retirement benefits etc. Hence this execution application is not maintainable and liable to be dismissed and accordingly it should be dismissed.

Heard the rival submissions and verified the documents available in this execution application.

An order dated 03.05.2019 mentions that the claim of the applicant has been accepted by granting proforma fixation of the pay to the grade 1600-2660 even though he has never shouldered the higher responsibility. The relevant portion of the order dated 03.05.2019 is reproduced below:-

“The benefit of the structuring of certain Group ‘C’ and ‘D’ cadre with effect from 1993 was introduced by the Railway Board and in pursuance thereof the necessary steps have been taken at the competent level. In this regard it will be relevant to inform you that in the aforesaid instruction the category to which you belong the existing percentage of 40.5% has been revised to 30% in the grade Rs.2000-3200 and as such there exists no vacancy against which your candidature could have been considered for granting proforma fixation all over again at this belated stage and hence your claim is decided accordingly.”

A minute study of the order in OA No.1201 of 2008, the order passed by the competent authority dated 03.05.2019, the averments made in the execution application and averments made in the counter reply reveal that the direction issued by this Tribunal in OA No.1201/2008 has been implemented/complied. This Tribunal directed the respondents to consider the case of the applicant if it is found fit as per the rules and the order passed by the respondents is in accordance with such directions.

In the light of above discussions this execution application no.1717 of 2019 is liable to be rejected. Accordingly, the same is rejected. No Costs. Pending MAs, if any, stands disposed of.