IMPORTANT POINT
Delays in appointment orders by the Railway cannot be used to deny applicants the benefits of the Old Pension Scheme, as affirmed by the Supreme Court.

JUDGMENT :

(AMIT RAWAL, J.)

[OP (CAT) Nos.149/2023, 138/2023, 168/2023, 169/2023, 172/2023, 188/2023, 166/2024 24/2025 & 121/2024]

The controversy involved in these cases are with regard to the retrenchment of some project casual labourers. The retrenchment was the subject matter of consideration before the Apex Court inInderpal Yadav and Others Vs. Union of India [1985 SCC (L&S) 526] and connected cases, whereby the Apex Court has directed the Railways to prepare a divisional list of all project casual labourers in each Division of the Railways who had been retrenched after the cut- off date mentioned and directed to consider them for future engagement. In obedience to the directions in Inderpal Yadav (Supra), notifications dated 27.01.2003 and 18.02.2003 were issued inviting applications to fill up the vacancies to the post of Trackmen. All the applicants were called upon for the document verification and medical examination. After medical examination, the applicants were appointed as Track Maintainers. It is a matter of record that few of them were appointed after 01.01.2004, therefore, could not have been brought under the Old Pension Scheme.

2. This Court, in the judgment dated 04.04.2023 in O.P(CAT)No.79 of 2022, held that since the Railway caused delay in issuing the appointment orders from 2003 till 2004, the same could not be used against the applicants to deny the benefit of the old Pension Scheme as the New Pension Scheme has come into force with effect from 01.01.2004.

3. The aforementioned judgment dated 04.04.2023 was assailed before the Supreme Court in S.L.P.No.24719 of 2023 which has been dismissed vide order dated 29.01.2025.

4. This Court noticing the fact that the matter is pending before the Supreme Court, had been adjourning the hearing. The decision of the Central Administrative Tribunal in all these cases are based on the same ratio culled out by this Court in O.P(CAT)No.79 of 2022 dated 04.04.2023.

In view of the fact that the S.L.P. has been dismissed, we are of the view that there is no merit in the matter. Therefore the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal is upheld, consequently the original petitions stand dismissed.