K. Balakrishnan Nair, J.

The point put-forward for our decision in this Original Petition is the permissibility of reduction of pay of a Government servant long after his retirement with effect from a date long before his superannuation.

2. The skeletal facts absolutely necessary for the disposal of the case are the following:

3. The petitioner was an Inspector (Works) Grade I in the Railways under the second respondent. By way of punishment for misconduct, he was compulsorily retired from service on 26.11.1990. The said punishment has become final. While so, on 24.9.1993 almost after three years of his retirement from service, his pay was reduced with effect from 1.11.1986 without notice or hearing to the applicant. Consequently, his pension was refixed and the alleged excess payment was 'recovered' from the amounts due to him. The aggrieved petitioner approached the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ernakulam Bench by filing O.A. No. 1021/97 praying, 'inter alia, for a declaration that the "revision/reduction of the applicant's pay after retirement is illegal and direct the respondents to regulate his salary accordingly." It was the 8th relief sought in the O.A. There Wer