Judgment

BEG, J. :- The plaintiff-appellant s allegations, in the suit which comes up by special leave before us, may be stated as follows.

The appellant was appointed a Clerk on 29-7-1925 at Gorakhpur in the Accounts Department of what was then the Bengal North Eastern Railway. In January, 1930, he was appointed an Assistant Office Superintendent. The Railway was taken over by the State and renamed as Oudh Tirhut Railway (O.T.R.) and, subsequently, it became the North Eastern Railway. In January, 1949, the appellant was appointed officiating Assistant Secretary to the General Manager as a Class II Officer. On 11-5-1949, he was prompted to the post of Office Superintendent . But, on that very date, he was served with a charge-sheet by the Deputy General Manager and called upon to explain, within 3 days, the use of certain first class passes issued to him. On 14-5-1949, he submitted his explanation and justified the use of these passes by quoting specific rules and similar instances. On 29-6-1949 the General Manager reverted the appellant from the post of Office Superintendent to that of the Assistant Office Superintendent with effect from 1-7-1949 without holding any enquiry at all as required by the Disciplinary and Appeal Rules of the Railway. The appellant s case is that, despite his demotion, he continued to perform the duties of the Office Superintendent presumably because he was efficient. On 27-7-1949, the appellant filed on appeal to the General Manager with the result that, on 29-11-1950, the Deputy General Manager had to withdraw the charges with the remarks: "since the appellant had used the passes under a genuine and reasonable belief, no stigma was attached . Thereupon, the appellant applied to the General Manager for formal reinstatement in the post of Office Superintendent and payment of arrears of his salary. Curiously, the General Manager, while awarding an honorarium of Rs. 40/- per month for the additional work of Office Superintendent done by the appellant, practically upheld the reversion order with the remark that the appellant s guilt was established. Against this order the appellant filed an appeal on 30-7-1952 to the Railway Board through the General Manager which was duly forwarded to the Railway Board on 19-5-1952. On 30th October, 1954, the Railway Board sent a letter to the General Manager stating that the question raised by the appellant was not a "live issue" and, therefore, there was no reason to interfere with the General Manager s action. On 30-9-1959, the appellant retired at the age of 57 despite his claim that he was entitled to continue up to the age of 60 years. The appellant alleged that he received no intimation about the disposal of his appeal by the Railway Board despite the fact that he went on sending reminders to the Railway Board. On 15-12-1959, the Railway Board had asked for clarification from him. He had also been assured by the then General and Deputy General Managers, in 1961, that his case would be decided to his satisfaction. Furthermore, he alleged that he wrote to the General Manager on 16-3-1962, and, again on 22-3-1962. to find out the result of his appeal, but he received no answer. Therefore, finally, he served a notice on 24-9-1962 under Section 80 Civil Procedure Code upon the General Manager. North Eastern Railway, Gorakhpur, and the Union of India. He claimed that Rs. 21,088,04 was due to him as arrears of salary and allowances. He filed his suit on 27-11-62 for a declaration that from 1-7-1949, the date of illegal reversion, up to 30-9-1959, the date of the appellant s retirement, he was a Railway employee on a salary ranging from Rs. 450/- to Rs. 575/- per month, together with 20% special pay from 10-5-1956 to 30-9-1959 and increased gratuity, and that, after his retirement, he became entitled to the appropriate pension and gratuity allowance. He had also demanded payment of a sum of Rs.19,795/- the details of which were given in a schedule, after relinquishing R