UNION OF INDIA Vs. BIMAL KUMAR RAKSHIT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the instant writ petition, the petitioners before us is the Union of India and certain officials of Northern Frontier Railway challenging an order passed by Central Administrative Tribunal, Calcutta Bench, holding that the petitioner is entitled to pension for his service rendered to the said Railways.

(2.) The admitted position is that the petitioner was initially appointed as a casual worker on 5th February, 1982 and continued as such till he was granted temporary status with effect from 1st January, 1984. His service was regularized on 15th September, 1992. Under the relevant provisions of law, a railway servant becomes entitled to pension only upon completing service for a period of 10 years. In the present case the main dispute revolves around the methodology for computation of this period of 10 years. The Tribunal in this Judgment has held that since the petitioner was granted temporary status from 1st January, 1984 he should have been treated to be in service from that date continuously, followed by his regular appointment in Group 'C' post. On this basis, the Tribunal has come to a finding that total period of service rendered by him comes to more than 10 years and he is thus entitled to pension as per rules.

(3.) Ms. Banerjee, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the Railway authorities has taken us through three decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, being Inder Pal Yadav v. Union of India, reported in 1985(2) SLR 248, Ram Kumar & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors., reported in 1988(1) SCC 306 and Union of India & Ors. v. K.G. Radhakrishana Panickar & Ors., reported in 1998(5) SCC 111.