Ad-hoc service without substantive appointment does not qualify for pension under Railway Pension Rules 1993; no relaxation permissible; negative equality cannot legitimize erroneous prior grants.

ORDER 

AS PER:- AJAY PRATAP SINGH, MEMBER[JUDICIAL]

1. Present original application has been filed under Section 19, Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 to set-aside order dated 03.07.2019 issued by Railway Board, whereby G.M., ECR proposed for seeking relaxation in Rule 20 of Railway Services (Pension) Rules, 1993 (for brevity hereinafter referred as Rules 1993) found to be not fit case for consideration and accordingly order dated 17.07.2019 in compliance to this Tribunal order dated 24.04.2018 passed in OA No.779/2016. So also seeking similarl benefits as granted to Ad-hoc Dr (Mrs.) Kunno Kumari Chaurasia along with interest.

PRAYER

2. Applicants have claimed following main reliefs (extracted from OA) is under:-

“ 8.1 The order as contained in Annexure A-1 passed by the respondent no.3 be quashed and set aside and the applicants should be paid similarly situated Ad-hoc/ doctor named Dr. (Mrs.) Kunno Kumari Chaurasia within a time fixed by this Hon'ble Court.

8.2 The respondents may be directed to pay interest on the retiral benefits for the delay.

8.3 Any other relief or reliefs may be granted to the applicants to which they are found entitled to by this Hon'ble Court.

8.4 The cost of litigation may be passed in favour of the applicants.”

FACTS IN BRIEF

3. Shorn of unnecessary details, briefly stated facts adumbrated in the OA by applicants that applicant no.1 was appointed on 07.02.1986 as Ad-hoc-doctor under Eastern Railway Hospital in Dhanbad Division now under East Central Railway and superannuated on 29.02.2016. Applicant no.2 also appointed on 05.08.1986 as Ad-hoc doctor under Eastern Railway, Kolkata, Gaya Railway Hospital. Now East Central Railway and redesignated as Assistant Medial Officer (in short AMO) and superannuated on 31.05.2016.

4. It is also case of applicants that applicants along with Dr. (Mrs.) Kunno Kumari Chaurasia failed to qualify in the selection test held by UPSC and third time also could not qualify. Dr. (Mrs.) Kunno Kumari Chaurasiya superannuated w.e.f. 31.12.2014. Dr. (Mrs.) Kunno Kumari Chaurasia and applicants services were terminated and this Tribunal in OA No.690/2004 vide order dated 21.01.2011 directed to consider case of applicants for giving ad-hoc appointment. The respondents filed CWJC No. 3517/2012 arising out of order dated 21.01.2021 and writ petition on 20.06.2016 was disposed of as all employees superannuated. Applicants continued for 30 years not paid pension benefits, whereas Dr. (Mrs.) Kunno Kumari Chaurasia has been paid pension and applicants claiming parity by relaxation in Rule 20 of Rules 1993 invoking Rule 107 of Rules, 1993.

5. Applicants also stated that they have filed OA No. 779 of 2016 and this Tribunal vide order dated 24.04.2018 directed GM, ECR to invoke Rule 107 of Rules 1993 and sent a proposal for relaxation of Section 107 of Rules 1993. The Secretary, Railway Board vide impugned order dated 03.07.2019 Annexure A-1 rejected the claim of applicants that there is no provision under Rule 20 of Rules 1993 for counting of ad-hoc-service of an employee even substantively appointed in service substantively and DoPT, Government of India, observed that there is no question of relaxation of any rule in this case. Hence, the OA.

6. Per contra, respondents have contested the claim of appli