B Radhakrishnan Nair vs SOUTHERN RAILWAY

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
ERNAKULAM BENCH
O.A.No.180/00509/2023
th
Thursday, this the 20 day of August, 2026
CORAM:
HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE K. HARIPAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE Mr. BRAJ MOHAN AGRAWAL, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER
B. Radhakrishnan Nair, Aged 65 years, S/o K.Balakrishna Kurup,
Retired Shunting Master Grade-I (Traffic) (Officiating),
Thiruvananthapuram Central Railway Station,
Residing at: "Punartham", No. 18/414 B, Vaiga Gardens,
Aruvipuram, Peyad.P.O. Vilappil, Thiruvananthapuram - 695 573.
-Applicant
[By Advocates: Mr.T.C.Govindaswamy, Mrs.Kala T Gopi,
Mr.Sudhir Kumar B, Mrs.Nishitha Balachandran,
Mr.Kailesh T Gopi, Ms.Shahanaz Salim]
V e r s u s
1. Union of India, represented by The General Manager, Southern Railway,
Headquarters Office, Park Town P.O., Chennai-600 003.
2. The Chief Personnel Officer, Southern Railway, Headquarters Office, Park
Town P.O., Chennai-600 003.
3. The Senior Divisional Operations Manager, Southern Railway,
Thiruvananthapuram Division, Thiruvananthapuram - 695 014.
4. The Senior Divisional Personnel Officer, Southern Railway,
Thiruvananthapuram Division, Thiruvananthapuram - 695 014.
-Respondents
[By Advocate: Mr.Anil Prasad, ACGSC]
The application having been heard on 18.08.2026, the Tribunal on
20.08.2026 delivered the following order:
Deepa S 2026.09.01 13:16:06+05'30'

2
O R D E R
Justice K.Haripal, Judicial Member
Applicant claims that he is a retired Shunting Master Grade-I (Traffic)
(Officiating) in Thiruvananthapuram Central Railway Station, who had retired
from service on superannuation on 30.11.2017. He had started as a Traffic
Porter on 18.09.1980 and was promoted as Pointsman-A in PB-1 with grade
pay of Rs.1900/-. Then he was selected and appointed as Shunting Master
Grade-II on 11.04.2015. He took charge of the higher responsibilities on
11.04.2015. According to him, there were numerous vacancies of Shunting
Master Grade-I, thus on 16.04.2015 he took over charge of Shunting Master
Grade-I and continued to officiate in the higher post of Shunting Master
Grade-I in PB-2 with grade pay of Rs.4200/- till his date of superannuation on
30.11.2017.
2. The grievance of the applicant is that he was holding charge of
th
higher responsibilities of Shunting Master Grade-I; though the 4 respondent
had made repeated correspondences with higher officials, he was not granted
officiating allowance or fixation of pay in the higher post and that prompted
him to approach the Tribunal seeking the following reliefs:
“(i) Declare that the applicant is entitled to have his pay fixed
as Shunting Master Grade-I in PB-2 + GP Rs.4200/- w.e.f. 16.04.2015
in Level-6 of the Pay Matrix with all consequential benefits arising
Deepa S 2026.09.01 13:16:06+05'30'

3
therefrom;
(ii) Direct the respondents to fix the applicant's pay as Shunting
Master Grade-I in PB-2 GP Rs.4200/- w.e.f. 16.04.2015, and direct
further to revise applicant's pay, pension and other retirement
benefits on that basis, and to pay the same, within a time frame as
may be found just and proper by this Hon'ble Tribunal.”
3. The applicant submits, with reference to information gathered
under the Right to Information Act, Annexure-A7 series, that there were
numerous vacancies of Shunting Master Grade-I in Trivandrum Centre. Most
of those posts were remaining unfilled and thus the respondents gave him
oral directions to hold the higher responsibilities. Annexure-A3 has been
highlighted to say that his name was also recommended for grant of
officiating allowance for the period from 16.04.2015 to 15.04.2016 for holding
higher responsibilities of Shunting Master Grade-I. However, he was denied
benefits on the premise that residency period for grant of promotion is two
years and he had not completed two years. It is also submitted with reference
to materials including Annexure-A5(2) that on the lines of relaxation granted
in the case of Track Maintainer, recommendations were made for reducing the
period of residency for promotion as Shunting Master Grade-I from two years
to one year. It is also submitted that considering the work load and shortage
of staff of Shunting Master Grade-I, residency period was recommended to be
relaxed to one year, that was not responded by the respondents and
Deepa S 2026.09.01 13:16:06+05'30'

4
ultimately he had to retire from service on superannuation on 30.11.2017
while officiating in the post of Shunting Master Grade-I, thus he lost benefits
of higher pay and allowances and suffered heavy loss.
4. The contentions of the applicant show that from 16.04.2015 till
the date of superannuation on 30.11.2017, he was officiating as Shunting
Master Grade-I carrying pay in PB-2 with grade pay of Rs.4200/-, but the
benefits were not granted to him. According to the applicant, refusal on the
part of the respondents to fix his pay to that of Shunting Master Grade-I in PB-
2 with grade pay of Rs.4200/- with effect from 16.04.2015 is arbitrary,
discriminatory contrary to law and hence violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the
Constitution. He should have been granted fixation of pay in the higher post
with consequential benefits arising therefrom. Moreover, it is submitted that
there was no restraint for considering an employee for promotion on adhoc or
officiating basis even if one had not fulfilled the requirement of completion of
two years service in the lower post. According to him, two years is required
only at the time of regular promotion and not at the time of adhoc
promotion. Therefore, the applicant submits that refusal on the part of the
respondents to fix the pay effective from 16.04.2015 in the higher post of
Shunting Master Grade-I is illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory and violative of
Articles 14, 16 and 300A of the Constitution.
Deepa S 2026.09.01 13:16:06+05'30'

5
th
5. On behalf of the respondents, the 4 respondent filed a reply
denying the contentions in the O.A. According to him, the applicant had
retired from service on 30.11.2017, but the reliefs were claimed without
specifying any Rule, that the O.A. has been filed after a period of five years
from the date of retirement.
6. Further, it is submitted that the applicant was appointed as a
substitute in the pay scale of Rs.196-232 in Thiruvananthapuram Division on
18.09.1980. He was promoted as Pointsman A on 26.02.1999 with grade pay
nd rd
of Rs.1900/- in level-2. Later, he was granted 2 and 3 financial upgradations
under MACP scheme from 01.09.2008 and 18.09.2010 in level-3 and level-4
respectively. While he was in upgraded pay in level-4, was selected and
appointed as Shunting Master Grade-II in level-4 and thereafter on
completion of two years residency period as per the Rule, he was promoted
as Shunting Master Grade-I in level-6, from 28.04.2017.
7. Further, it is submitted that eligibility for promotion within
Group-C is two years in the immediate lower grade irrespective of whether
the employees belong to reserved community or not. In the case of safety
categories, the condition of two years service in the immediate lower grade
will apply to promotion of Group-D staff also. The applicant had not
completed two years of residency period in the post of Shunting Master
Deepa S 2026.09.01 13:16:06+05'30'

6
Grade-II in 2015. He was appointed on promotion as Shunting Master Grade-
II on 11.04.2015. The question of promoting him as Shunting Master Grade-I
in 2015 or 2016 on adhoc or regular basis did not arise. On completion of two
years residency period he was promoted as Shunting Master Grade-I in level-6
with effect from 28.04.2017.
8. Referring to Annexure-R1, extract from IREC Volume-II Chapter-14
it is submitted that 'when a non-gazetted Railway servant belonging to the
category as indicated in Annexure-R1, or the categories, if any, included in the
list from time to time is put to officiate in continuous shift duties, from a
lower grade to higher grade and in vacancies where a change of category is
involved, but not for a change of grade only within the same category, he will
be entitled to get an allowance at daily rates revised from time to time
termed as 'daily officiating allowance'.'
9. It is further shown in Annexure-R1 that 'where a period initially
21 days or less extends subsequently to more than 21 days, the officiating
allowance at the daily rates drawn upto 21 days should be allowed to stand,
but if the period exceeds 21 days payment should be in accordance with the
rules applicable for normal fixation of pay'.
10. Referring to paragraph 33 of IREM Volume -I it is submitted that
'officiating' means the Railway servant officiates in a post where he performs
Deepa S 2026.09.01 13:16:06+05'30'

7
duties of a post on which any other person holds a lien or when a competent
authority appoints him to officiate in a vacant post on which no other Railway
servant holds lien. The applicant was not so appointed nor held any such lien
and on completion of two years residency period he was promoted and
appointed as Shunting Master Grade-I in PB-2 with grade pay of Rs.4200/- and
worked till the date of superannuation on 30.11.2017.
11. Further, it is submitted that the statement of the officiating
allowance for the period from 16.04.2015 to 15.04.2016 in Annexure-A3 has
not been annexed by the applicant. Besides this, though the period of
officiating service is from 16.04.2015 to 15.04.2016, the applicant has claimed
the officiating allowance/fixation of pay with effect from 16.04.2015 to
30.11.2017 till the date of superannuation. Basing on Anneure-R2 it is
submitted that payment on account of daily officiating allowance was
st
discontinued with effect from 1 July 2017.
12. The respondents have also denied the claim of the applicant that
he had submitted representations. As per Annexure-R1 he is not entitled to
get officiating allowance as he did not belong to the category of employees
scheduled therein. Since the applicant was promoted as Shunting Master
Grade-II with effect from 11.04.2015, he was due for next promotion only
after completion of two years as per Rules and the next promotion of
Deepa S 2026.09.01 13:16:06+05'30'

8
Shunting Master Grade-I was granted to him in level-6 with effect from
28.04.2017 as per Office Order No.T.25/2017/Tfc/Gr.D dated 28.04.2017.
Accordingly, his pay was fixed at Rs.41,100/- on promotion with effect from
28.04.2017 as per Memorandum No.V/P.536/II/Fixation of Pay/Vol.VI dated
22.05.2017 with effect from the date he assumed the duties of the post as per
paragraph 1302 of the IREC Chapter-13.
13. Further it is submitted that later his pay was fixed from
Rs.41,100/- to Rs 42,300/- in level-6 based on the option submitted by the
applicant with effect from 28.04.2017 vide Memorandum No.
V/P.536/II/Fixation of Pay/PM-I/GK I/Vol.VI/TFC-Gr-C dated 08.03.2018.
According to the applicant, his pay should have been given as per Rules at
Rs.41,100/- in level-6 with effect from 01.07.2017, but was fixed at
Rs.42,300/-.
14. Moreover, referring to the decision of the Hon'ble High Court in
Union of India and others v. K.V.Sudevan [2024 KER 4877], it is submitted, with
reference to paragraph 1302 of IREC that, normally there is no right for a
Government servant to claim retrospective promotion. In such circumstance,
there is no question of granting retrospective promotion and all claims and
contentions regarding future career, pension and other retirement benefits
are based on assumptions and not factual or legal. So, the O.A. is sought to
Deepa S 2026.09.01 13:16:06+05'30'

9
be dismissed.
15. We heard Adv.Sri.Vipin Varghese on behalf of
Sri.T.C.Govindaswamy, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri.Anil Prasad,
learned Additional Central Government Standing Counsel for the respondents.
16. It is not disputed that the applicant had commenced service as a
Traffic Porter on 18.09.1980. Later, he was promoted as Pointsman-A. While
working as such, he was granted two non-functional upgradations under the
MACP Scheme. Later, he was selected and appointed as Shunting Master
Grade-II on 11.04.2015. He retired on superannuation on 30.11.2017 on
attaining the age of 60.
17. The O.A. has been filed as though he was working as officiating
Shunting Master Grade-I, that he was not granted fixation of pay in the grade
pay of Rs.4200/-. He submits that even though he assumed charge of
Shunting Master Grade -II on 11.04.2015, from 16.04.2015 onwards he had
been holding higher responsibilities of Shunting Master Grade-I and in that
capacity he worked till the date of retirement. Though repeated
representations were given, his prayer for granting promotion was not
considered. Similarly, it is submitted that there were large number of
vacancies of Shunting Master Grade-I, but on the premise that he had not
completed two years residency period in the post of Shunting Master Grade-II,
Deepa S 2026.09.01 13:16:06+05'30'

10
the respondents refused to grant him promotion; he was not granted
officiating allowance nor fixation of pay in the higher post and that prompted
him to approach the Tribunal.
18. On the other hand, the respondents have submitted that since
grant of officiating allowance is guided by Chapter-14 of IREC Volume-II
paragraph 1427, those categories of employees scheduled in the paragraph
alone are entitled to get officiating allowance, even such officiating allowance
has been stopped with effect from 01.07.2017 as resolved in Annexure-R2.
According to them, the applicants are not entitled to get officiating allowance
with the pay of Shunting Master Grade-I. Since he had not completed
residency period of two years in the post of Shunting Master Grade-II, he was
not entitled for fixation also. After completion of two years, on 28.04.2017 he
was promoted as Shunting Master Grade-I, was granted higher fixation and he
retired in the scale of Shunting Master Grade-I with grade pay of Rs.4,200/-
with the basic pay of Rs.42,300/- in level-6. Despite these statements
contradicting the claims of the applicant in the Original Application, the
applicant failed to file a rejoinder repudiating the contentions in the reply
statement. In the factual scenario, filing a rejoinder was essential and non-
filing of such a rejoinder is a matter of adverse presumption.
19. It is the common case that the applicant was promoted as
Deepa S 2026.09.01 13:16:06+05'30'

11
Shunting Master Grade-I from 11.04.2015; Annexure-A2 shows that he had
taken higher responsibilities that day. According to the applicant, he took
over charge of Shunting Master Grade-I on 16.04.2015, after five days of
taking higher responsibilities. He has not produced any document to prove
such an appointment. But, according to him, it was on the basis of oral
directions only. In order to support the claim, he has placed reliance on
Annexure-A3. It is hard to believe that he was appointed as Shunting Master
Grade-I on the basis of an oral direction. Secondly, since the Rules provide for
two years residency period in the feeder category of Shunting Master Grade-
II, it is improbable that he was appointed as such. That means, the claim that
he had held the post of Shunting Master Grade-I effective from 16.04.2015 is
liable to be discounted.
20. Again, Annexure-A3 is a communication issued by the Station
Manager recommending grant of officiating allowance to the applicant and
others for the period from 16.04.2015 to 15.04.2016. Some Annexures, which
were given along with Annexure-A3 have not been placed before the Tribunal.
From Annexure-R1 it is clear that the post of Shunting Master Grade-I or such
categories are not included in the schedule so that such a post did not attract
eligibility for grant of officiating allowance.
21. Moreover, he has placed reliance only on certain internal
Deepa S 2026.09.01 13:16:06+05'30'

12
communications to say that the respondents were trying to slash the
residency period to one year from two years as done in the case of Track
Maintainer. But the post of Track Maintainer and Shunting Master are
different. Even if one time reduction of residency period was granted in the
case of Track Maintainer, such a proposal has not been considered at the
appropriate level in the case of Shunting Master Grade-I.
22. We specifically notice that, the respondents have contended that
after the completion of two years residency period, the applicant was granted
promotion as Shunting Master Grade-I from 28.04.2017. This has not been
denied. As we have already stated, non-filing of a rejoinder is very material
and it is a matter of adverse inference against the applicant.
23. It is also submitted that he had given representation for grant of
officiating allowance/fixation. In fact, claim for officiating allowance and claim
for fixation are two different concepts. The applicant cannot claim officiating
allowance since that does not form part of the schedule in Annexure-R1. He
could not claim fixation also since he was not granted promotion as Shunting
Master Grade-I prior to 28.04.2017. In a way, the Original Application is bad
for suppression of material facts. He had retired from service on 30.11.2017,
but the O.A. is seen verified on 15.10.2023, after nearly six years of
retirement from service. Though the respondents have not produced copy of
Deepa S 2026.09.01 13:16:06+05'30'

13
the order granting him promotion as Shunting Master Grade-I, all the details
of the order including order number and details regarding his fixation of pay
at Rs.42,300/- have been stated in clear terms. Still, the O.A. has been filed as
though the applicant had retired as an officiating Shunting Master Grade-I
with the basic pay of that of the Shunting Master Grade-II. The O.A. is bad for
suppression of material facts.
24. After evaluating the rival contentions and materials, we have no
doubt that the applicant has moved the Tribunal on experimental basis. There
is considerable delay in moving the Tribunal. In fact he has cause of action
from 16.04.2015. Even when reckoned from the date of retirement, the O.A.
is time barred. The long delay is not explained. The O.A. is liable to be
dismissed on that ground alone. The Original Application is filed without good
faith and is dismissed. However, we abstain from awarding costs.
th
( Dated, this the 20 day of August, 2026)
BRAJ MOHAN AGRAWAL JUSTICE K.HARIPAL
ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
ds
Deepa S 2026.09.01 13:16:06+05'30'

14
List of Annexures
Annexure-A1: A true copy of the office order bearing No.T 5/2015/Tfc/
Gr.D dated 10.04.2015.
Annexure-A2: A true of the copy order bearing No.TVC/III/Tfc/S.S.N/
Vol.20 dated 13.04.2015, issued by the Station Manager,
Southern Railway, Thiruvananthapuram Central.
Annexure-A3: A true copy of the letter bearing No.TVC/IX/NDA/NHA/OA/
Vol.21 dated 21.06.2016, addressed to the 4th respondent.
Annexure-A4: A true copy of the letter bearing No.V/P.536/II/Shg.MII/
Vol.VI dated 08.03.2017 addressed to the second
respondent-Chief Personnel Officer.
Annexure-A5: A true copy of the letter bearing No.V/P.536/II/Shg.MII/Vol.
VI dated 08.03.2017 by the 2nd respondent.
Annexure-A6: A true copy of the representation submitted by the
applicant dated 15.10.2022.
Annexure-A7 series: True copies of the communications under the RTI sought
by the applicant and the replies thereto.
Annexure R1: A true copy of Para-1427 of Chapter 14 of IREC Vol-II
Annexure R2: A true copy of Railway Board letter No.E(P&A)I-2011/FE-
4/1 dated 05.09.2017 circulated as RBE No. 120/2017

*
Deepa S 2026.09.01 13:16:06+05'30'