Employees with similar circumstances should receive equal consideration for pension benefits.

ORDER

The applicant has filed the O.A under section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act , seeking the following relief(s): -

(i) To issue writ, order or direction in the nature of CERTIORARY to quash and set aside the impugned order dated 12.09.2018 passed by respondent No. 2 (Annexure A-1) thereby the respondents rejected the representation dated 31.07.2017 regarding benefits of regular absorption in Gr-D from November-December 2004 at per the scheme and judgment dated 29.04.2004 qua with his counterparts who were regularized n November-December whereas applicant could be regularized as late as on 23.06.2015 due to administrative reasons as admitted by respondents in their letter dated 17.07.2003 and 03.06.2015 with all consequential benefits etc;

(ii) To issue further writ, order or direction in the nature of MANDAMUS, thereby commanding to fix his pay, to pay arrear of salary, and grant seniority condoning the break of service between Nov-Dec 2004 to that of 23.06.2015;

(iii) To issue further writ, order or direction in the suitable nature, thereby commanding the respondents to be reckoned 50% qualifying service for counting services rendered as Casual Labour and MRCL till his absorption for the purpose of pensionary benefits and necessary entry whereof may be made in his Service Record in the light of the judgment dated 24.03.2017;

(iv) To issue order or direction to include and provide the benefits of old pension scheme at par with substitutes vide circular dated 29.10.2014 in the light of para IV of judgment dated 24.03.2017 of Hon’ble Apex Court;

(v) To issue any other suitable order in favour of the applicant as deemed just and proper by this Hon’ble Tribunal in the facts and circumstances of the case;

(vi) To award cost of the application in favour of the humble applicant.”

2. It is the case of applicant that he was engaged as Hot Weather casual labour on 01.06.1987 and worked up to 15.04.1991. After completion of 120 days, he obtained the MRCL status. After dispensing with work by the respondents, Hot Weather MRCLs including present applicant raised Industrial Dispute No. 201/1991 before CGIT, Kanpur and the award was given in their favour with direction to the Railways to frame a scheme for regular absorption in Group ‘D’ as per seniority. The aforesaid award was stayed by the Hon’ble High Court in W.P. No. 132/1997 and 930/1997 on 26.04.1997 subject to payment of last drawn wages to the MRCLs. The applicant was paid wages on different dates. The W.P. No. 132/97 was disposed off on 24.09.2004 by Hon’ble High Court directing Respondent that the services of the workman shall he regularized in group D' as per scheme in due time. Prior to above judgment, the Respondent framed the policy vide letter No. 11.05.1999 fixing cut off date 01.04.1999 for age limit. The notification was issued on 30.08.2001 asking bio data on prescribed form from workman through Depot In charge, as such, the applicant submitted application duly verified by last Depot In charge within time. The Constituted Screening Committee found applicant suitable amongst 1241 eligible list of candidates in which the name of the applicant is figured at Sr. No. 182. The date of birth was shown correctly as 02.05.1960 however, the date of appointment is wrongly shown as 01.04.1967 instead of 01.06.1987 in specific column. The list of 1247 eligible candidates was approved by GM CR on 13.12.2002 in which the name of the applicant was not included. Due to non inclusion of the name of applicant, he represented through the then MP Shri Sujan Singh Bundela and again correct details of the applicant i.e. Date of Birth 02.05.1960, Date of