CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCH th Dated this the 07 day of January, 2026 CORAM:

Hon’ble Shri Jayesh V Bhairavia, Member (J)

Hon’ble Dr. Hukum Singh Meena, Member (A)

Shri Ramniklal N. Lunagaria S/o. Nathabhai B. Lunagaria Aged 59 years, Working As SM, Bileshwar under Under DRM (E), RJT R/O.:, Ranchodnagar Society, "Om Somnath"

K. J.Vekariya Road, Rajkot-360 003 ….Applicant (By Advocate:Ms.S.S.Chaturvedi)

Versus

1. Union of India, Notice to be served through, General Manager, Western Railway, Churchgate, Mumbai-400 020.

2. The Divisional Railway Manager (E), Rajkot Division, Kothi Compound Rajkot-360 001 ….Respondents (By Advocate: Ms.R.R.Patel)

O R D E R Per : Hon’ble Dr.Hukum Singh Meena, Member (A)

1. Being aggrieved by the order No.ET/1025/1 dated 26.02.2008 by the DRM (E) Rajkot whereby, the pay of the applicant herein was fixed from 01.11.2006 in place of 06.04.2004, the applicant has filed this Original Application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985 seeking following relief:-

“8.1 Lord ships be pleased to admit this petition.

And be pleased to quash and set aside order no. ET/1025/1 dated 26.02.2008 Annexure A/1. And be pleased to direct the respondent to revise the pay fixation as per office letter dated 06.04.2004 with all consequential benefit and accordingly revised the Pension pay order (PPO).

8.2 The Order for be call for the record.

8.3 Any other relief which the Hon'ble Tribunal deems fit.

8.4 Cost of suit be awarded.”

2. Brief facts of the case of the applicant are as follows:-

2.1 The applicant was working as a Station Master at Bileshwar Station in the pay scale of Rs.5500-9000 in pre- revised scale of V CPC with the Basic Pay of Rs.7075. The respondent No.2 issued a Memorandum vide No.ET/839/55 dated 06.04.2004 for cadre restructuring whereby the applicant was promoted under cadre restructuring order in the pay scale of Rs.6500-10500/- under item (b) for promotion Order dated 06.04.2004 which stated that “They have been promoted from the date of resumption as SS.” The applicant’s name appeared in Para B, Sl. No.23 for suitability panel and at Serial No.10 for Promotion Order (Annexure-A/3).

2.2 The applicant’s pay was fixed as Rs.7700/- from the date of joining. In the said order at page No.9, it was mentioned that “their pay on promotion is fixed, however they are entitled to submit option for fixation of pay on promotion within one month.” The applicant also referred IREM para 1313 FR-22 IREC Vol.II wherein it was stated that as per the option of the applicant the date of his next increment in lower grade was from 01.05.2004. The Respondent No.2 issued Memorandum vide No.ET/773/Tfc dated 24.05.2004 for the fixation of pay. The applicant’s name appeared at B. Serial No.02 and pay was fixed at Rs.7075/- from 01.04.2004 and Rs.7300/- from

01.05.2004 (Annexure-A/4).

2.3 It was mentioned that as per the recommendation of VI CPC, the applicant’s pay was correctly fixed as per his option w.e.f 01.01.2006. The date of increment was mentioned as on 01.05.2004 as per rules and option submitted under the VI CPC. Consequently, a common date of increment for all the employees was fixed i.e., from 01.07.2006.

2.4 It was further stated that in the meeting of the employees with the management in the PNM item No.76/13 which was represented to revise the applicant’s pay fixation as per option given by him in the pre-revised pay scale of Rs.6500-10500 and their pay was fixed as Rs.7900/-from 01.05.2004 and Rs.7500/- from 06.04.2004 which was reduced with retrospective effect. The respondent replied that the pay fixation was revised as per the DRM (E) letter No.ET/1025/1 dated 26.02.2008 w.e.f 01.11.2003. It was also against the principle of natural justice that the effect of communication of DRM (E) dated 26.06.2008 was neither communicated nor received by the employee as well as Station Master of the concerned stations which was also admitted by the respondent. In the PNM, the applicant’s pay was fixed a