(Reserved on 29.01.2026)

Central Administrative Tribunal, Allahabad Bench, Allahabad Original Application NO. 330/00801/2019 This the 03 rd day of February, 2026.

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Om Prakash VII, Member (J)

Rammal Prasad S/o Late Ram Bali, R/o Village Dhorika Post Siarapar (Water Ganj), District Basti (U.P)

………..Applicant By Advocate: Sri Syed Wajid Ali/Shri Anuj Kumar Sharma/Shri Atul Srivastava Versus

1. Union of India through its Secretary, Ministry of Water Resources, Government of India, New Delhi.

2. Chairman, Central Water Commission, R.K. Puram, New Delhi.

3. Executive Engineer, Middle Ganga Division – I, Lucknow.

4. Executive Engineer, Middle Ganga Division – III, Varanasi.

5. Executive Engineer, CD, CWC, Bengaluru.

MANISH KUMAR Respondents SRIVASTAVA By Advocate: Shri Ram Chandra Sahu

ORDER

The present Original Application has been filed by the applicant under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 for the following reliefs:-

“(i) Issue the order and quash the impugned letter dated 17.5.2019 issued by the respondent No. 5 (Annexure No. 4 of the OA).

(ii) Issue direction to the respondent No. 2 (Chairman Central Water Commission, R.K. Puram, New Delhi) as well as Respondent No. 5 (Executive Engineer, CD CWC, Bengaluru) sanction and provide the pension in favour of the applicant commuting the services freshly, in the light of judgment of Smt. Bhagwati & others Vs. Union of India &

others.

(iii) Issue such and further order or direction as this Hon’ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case.

(iv) Award the cost of petition/application in favour of the applicant”.

i. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the applicant was initially engaged on 15.06.1987 in Middle Ganga Division, Lucknow–I and continued to work uninterruptedly at different places. He was subsequently granted temporary status and his services were regularized on 09.03.2012 as Skilled Work Assistant. The respondents, by list dated 11.03.2016, treated the applicant as governed by the GPF scheme and denied him coverage under the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 on the ground that his regularization was after 01.01.2004. The applicant contends that his long service rendered prior to regularization, including service with temporary status, has not been properly counted. Applicant has relied upon the judgments of the Larger Bench consisting of the then Hon’ble Chairman, Vice Chairman and three Members of the Tribunal in the case of Bhagwati Devi vs. Union of India & Ors in OA No. 1722/2005 decided on 5.09.2007 wherein CAT Principal Bench, New Delhi has considered the judgment rendered in the case of Shyam Pyare Yadav and Others MANISH KUMAR SRIVASTAVA Vs. U.O.I. & Others decided on 06.05.2014 in OA No.3745/2012 by Principal Bench New Delhi as well as the case of General Manager, South Central Railway, Rail Nilayam Seconderabad AP and another Vs. Shaik Abdul Khadar reported in 2004(2) A.T.J 23 and the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Applicant claims that his pre-regularization service period is liable to be counted for pensionary benefits and that denial of pension to him is illegal.

3. The respondents have filed a counter affidavit stating that the applicant was engaged as a Seasonal Khalasi for intermittent periods between 07.06.1987 and 15.10.2010. He was regularized as a Skilled Work Assistant vide order dated 09.03.2012 and retired on attaining the age of superannuation on 30.06.2018 (A/N). It is stated that Seasonal Khalasis are unskilled workers engaged only during the monsoon season, generally from June/July to September/October each year, to meet temporary work requirements. The applicant was engaged only for short spells ranging from 92 to 139 days in a year and not on a continuous basis. After introduction of a scheme by the Government of India for grant of temporary status and regularization of Seasonal Khalasis in the work-charged establishment of CWC w.e.f. 01.06.1997, the applicant was granted temporary status