Central Administrative Tribunal
Prakashchandra Savjibhai Rathod vs M/o Railways on 30 October 2026
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD Order Sheet Item no.: 26 O.A./242/2018 (AHMEDABAD) [ PAY FIXATION ] With M.A./339/2018 Court No.: 1 No of Adjournment: 26 Order Dated: 30/10/2026 PRAKASHCHANDRA SAVJIBHAI RATHOD Vs M/O RAILWAYS
For Applicant(s) Advocate : HARSHAL N PANDYA, HIMANSHI R BALODI
For Respondent(s) Advocate : V K SINGH Order of The Tribunal
Counsel for the parties present. In the instant OA, the grievance of the applicant is about non-grant of pay being a redeployed ex-serviceman in the Railway. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the instructions/guidelines stipulated in para 3 (5) of OM dated 05.04.2010 (Annexure A/4) is applicable for the pay fixation of the pay of the applicant. It is not in dispute that the applicants herein joined their service as redeployed ex- serviceman in the Railways after 01.01.2006 and some of the applicants retired from the Military Service before attaining the age of 55 while working as below commissioned officer (non-commissioned). Therefore, their pay is required to be fixed as per the instructions contained in the para 3 (5) of the OM dated 05.04.2010. Further, learned counsel referred the instructions issued by the Railway Headquarter Mumbai vide communication dated 13.11.2013 (Annexure A/5) wherein it has been stated in para 2 that the pay fixation of employees appointed after 01.01.2006 be fixed as per para 3 (5) of the DoPT's letter dated 05.04.2010. Since, the applicant herein are appointed after 01.01.2006 their pay is reqired to be fixed in terms of para 3 (5) as per OM dated 05.04.2010 as well as clarification contained in para 2 of the letter dated 13.11.2013 of the Headquarter Mumbai. In support of the said submission, learned counsel for the applicants relied upon the pay fixation that has been undertaken in the different Government organization wherein the pay of the serviceman who joined after 01.01.2006 has been fixed as per the provisions contained in para 3 (5) of the OM dated 05.04.2010. Further, she referred the pay fixation order passed by Railway Authorities in this regard as well. Learned counsel also relied upon the order passed by the CAT, Bengaluru Bench in O.A. No. 109/2013 dated 18.06.2014 (Annexure A/10) wherein the similarly situated redeployed serviceman under the Railway raised their claim for fixation of their pay as per the para 3 (5) of the OM dated 05.04.2010 and after considering the submissions of both the parties therein, the CAT, Bengaluru Bench allowed the said OA with direction upon the respondents to fix the emoluments and other benefits of the applicants therein in accordance with Rule 3 (5) of the OM dated 05.04.2010 as the same is applicable to both Commissioned and Non-Commissioned Officers. Further, she fairly submits that being aggrieved with the said order dated 18.06.2014, the respondents therein had approached the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka by way of filing Writ Petition No. 5052/2015 which is pending for final hearing and as per the case status, the said writ petition is list for final hearing on 04.11.2026. On the other hand, counsel for the respondents by referring the para 3 & 4 of the reply submits that the provisions of order/rule 4 (d) i & ii of the OM dated 05.04.2010 apply in the case of the applicants herein and accordingly, their pay has been fixed by the respondents which is just and proper. Further, she submits that the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Basawa Raj & Anr. Vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer in Civil Appeal No. 6974/2014 is applicable in the present case. Heard both the parties at length. After arguing for some time both the counsel requested that the matter may be adjourned as the similar issued about applicability of the provisions contained in rule 3
(5) of OM dated 05.04.2010 is sub-judice before the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka. Request accepted.
Accordingly, list the matter for final hearing on 08.12.2026. Sanjiv Kumar Member (A) Jayesh V Bhairavia Member (J) Pratik Vyas ( steno 'c' )