Dev Raj vs NORTHERN RAILWAY on 30 October 2026

1. Union of India, through the General Manager, Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi.

2. The Divisional Railway Manager, Northern Railway, Hazratganj, Lucknow.

3. The Senior Divisional Personnel Officer, Northern Railway, Hazratganj, Lucknow.

4. The Senior Divisional Finance Manager, Northern Railway, Hazratganj, Lucknow. …..Respondents By Advocate: Smt. Prayagmati Gupta

ORDER (ORAL) Per Hon’ble Mr. Pankaj Kumar, Member-Administrative In this case relating to pension, the applicant has sought following reliefs:-

1. To quash the impugned order dated 30.08.2024 (contained as Annexure No.A-1 to this OA) with all consequential benefits.

2. To grant pension and other pensionary benefits after adding 50% of the total services rendered prior to regular appointment with the services rendered after regular appointment till retirement while extending the benefits of the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Union of India & others vs Munshi Ram and accord other ancillary benefits admissible after rendering 20 years of services.

3. To issue orders in respect of the applicant granting / treating him to be. the beneficiaries of Old Pension Scheme {Railway Services (Pension) Rules 1993} and accord other ancillary benefits.

4. To release the arrears of pension and other settlement dues under Old Pension Scheme alongwith interest @12% per annum from the date of due till the actual date of payment.

5. Any other relief, which this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit, just and proper under the circumstances of the case, may also be passed.

6. Cost of the present case.

2. The facts of the case are that the applicant was engaged as a Commission Vendor by the respondents. He was appointed to the regular post vide order dated 03.10.2005. In pursuance of RBE No. 28/2020, the applicant submitted his option for coverage under the Railway Servants (Pension) Rules, 1993 and having failed to elicit a response, he along with other persons, approached this Tribunal in OA No. 372 of 2021 which was disposed of with a direction to the respondents to decide their representation. Not satisfied with the rejection of their cases by the respondents vide order dated 22.02.2022, the applicant approached this Tribunal again in OA No. 406 of 2023 whereupon this Tribunal, vide order dated 06.10.2023, directed the respondents to take a decision on the option submitted by the applicant. Aggrieved by the order dated 30.08.2024 rejecting his case, the applicant has preferred this OA.

3. The applicant’s contention is that he was engaged as Commission Vendor by the respondents in the year 1977 and the issue of counting the service rendered as Commission Vendor has been settled by Hon’ble Supreme Court in Union of India & Ors vs Munshi Ram 2022 SCC Online SC 1493 holding that Commission Vendors/Bearers working in Northern Railway are entitled to have 50% of their service rendered prior to their regularization to be counted for pensionary benefits. It is contended that by not considering 50% of his service prior to regularization vide impugned order dated 30.08.2024, the respondents have acted in an illegal, arbitrary and discriminatory manner.

4. The respondents contend that for grant of pension, 10 years service is mandatory but in the applicant’s case, the total service rendered comes to 8 years, 11 months and 4 days only as he was appointed to the regular post after screening with effect from 26.10.2005.

5. Heard both the parties. 6.1 The issue before this Tribunal is whether the service rendered by the applicant as Commission Vendor prior to his regular appointment can be reckoned as qualifying service for the purpose of his pension benefits. 6.2 It is noted that this issue has been adjudicated by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the judgment and order dated 31.10.2022 in Munshi Ram (supra) in the following terms: “5… At the outset, it is required to be noted that the issue in the present case is with respect to Commission Vendors working in the Northern Railway and the issue is whether the Commission Vendors who were absorbed in the regular service are entitled to reckon 50% of the period of service as Commission Vendors, prior to their absorption, as qualifying service for grant of pensionary benefits, at par with the casual labourers whose services were regularized by virtue of Rule 2005 of the Indian Railway Establishment Manual, Vol. II, 1991 (IREM) r/w Rule 31 of the Railway Services (Pension) Rules, 1993. …

6. From the aforesaid, it can be seen that with respect to Commission Vendors/bearers working in the Western Railway, Eastern Railway, Southern Railway and South-Eastern Railway, they are held to be entitled to 50% of the services rendered prior to their regularization to be counted for pensionary benefits and all those Commission Vendors/bearers are granted such benefits. Now the dispute is with respect to Commission Vendors/bearers working in the Northern Railway.

7. It cannot be disputed that employees working in different divisions/zones in the Railways are under the very same employer – Railway Board which is under the Ministry of Railways. There are 16 Zones and 68 Divisions in the Railways. Therefore, the employees working under the same employer – Railway Board working in different Zones/Divisions are required to be treated similarly and equally and are entitled to similar benefits and are entitled to the same treatment. As rightly submitted on behalf of

the respondents, there cannot be any discrimination inter se. Under the circumstances, on the ground of parity, the Commission Vendors/bearers working in the Northern Railway are entitled to the same benefits which are held to be entitled to all the similarly situated Commission Vendors/Bearers working under different Zones/Divisions. There cannot be different criteria/parameters with respect to similarly situated employees – Commission Vendors/bearers working in different Zones/Divisions, but working under the same employer.

8. The Railways/UOI/Railway Board cannot be permitted to repeat the same arguments which were raised before different Tribunals, High Courts and also before this Court. Under the circumstances, the respondents – Commission Vendors/bearers working in the Northern Railway shall also be entitled to the same benefits which the other Commission Vendors/bearers working in different Zones/Divisions are held to be entitled to. There cannot be discrimination among the similarly situated Commission Vendors/bearers. To deny similar benefits would tantamount to discrimination and in violation of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. …

11. In view of the above and for the reasons stated above and even applying the doctrine of stare decisis, on the aforesaid ground alone, the present appeals deserve to be dismissed and are accordingly dismissed, by holding that the respondents – Commission Vendors/bearers working in the Northern Railway are entitled to have 50% of their services rendered prior to their regularization to be counted for pensionary benefits like other office bearers/Vendors working under the Railway Board, working in different zones/divisions, namely, Western Railway, Eastern Railway, Southern Railway and South-Eastern Railway.” (emphasis supplied) It is evident from the above that the Commission Vendors in Northern Railway are entitled to have 50% of their service prior to their regularization to be counted for pensionary benefits like their counterparts in other Railway Zones. 6.3 Coming to the case at hand and applying the ratio in Munshi Ram (supra), it is held that the applicant, having served as Commission Vendor in Northern Railway, is entitled to have 50% of his service as Commission Vendor, prior to his appointment on regular post with effect from 26.10.2005, counted as qualifying service for pensionary benefits. 7.1 In view of the foregoing, the impugned order dated 30.08.2024 is quashed and set aside.

7.2 The respondents are directed to reckon 50% of the service rendered by the applicant as Commission Vendor prior to his appointment on regular post with effect from 26.10.2005, as qualifying service for pensionary benefits under the Railway Service (Pension) Rules 1993 and make payment of arrears, without interest, to the applicant within three months of receipt of certified copy of this order. 7.3 This OA is disposed of in above terms. 7.4 Associated MAs also stand disposed of. 7.5 Parties shall bear their own costs.

(Pankaj Kumar)

Member (A)

Warij

Warij Yadav Digitally signed by Warij Yadav