Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 8
PETITIONER:
CENTRAL RAILWAY AUDIT STAFFASSOCIATION AND OTHERS ETC. ETC.
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
DIRECTOR OF AUDIT, CENTRAL RAILWAY AND OTHERS ETC.ETC.
DATE OF JUDGMENT20/04/1993
BENCH:
VENKATACHALA N. (J)
BENCH:
VENKATACHALA N. (J)
SAWANT, P.B.
CITATION:
1993 AIR 2467 1993 SCR (3) 296
1993 SCC Supl. (3) 458 JT 1993 (3) 142
1993 SCALE (2)577
ACT:
%
Railway Servants (pass) Rules, 1986:
Facilities and benefits of passes/P.T.O, Quarters etc.
allowed to Railway officers Group B category-Whether
Assistant Audit Officers, Group B Gazetted, under
Comptroller and Auditor General of India, working in Railway
Audit Department also entitled-Whether exclusion of
Assistant Audit Officers Group B gazetted, in pay scale Rs.
2000-3200, from Group B category of Railway Officers
violative of Article 14 of Constitution- Whether allowing
the benefits, only to Assistant Audit Officers given Group B
Gazetted status, between March 1, 1984 and December 31,
1985, is discriminatory.
HEADNOTE:
Petitioners were in service, under Comptroller and Auditor
General of India (C & AG for short), as Assistant Audit
Officers- (A.A.O. for short) Group B Gazetted, in pay scale
Rs. 2000-3200, and were working in Railway Audit Department,
after December 31,1985. In 1960, Railway Board spelled out
its policy, stating that scale of passes/P.T.0s. and the
rules governing their issue to staff of the Railway Audit
Department will be the same as applicable to Railway
servants. However some distinctions were made as regards
Indian Audit and Accounts Service Officers (IA & AS
Officers) of Railway Audit Department, on recommendations of
the C & AG., Central Government sanctioned higher scale of
pay effective from March 1, 1984, for 80 per cent of Section
officers in the Railway Audit Department to be designated as
A.A.Os (Group B-Gazetted). Their pay scale was revised to
Rs. 2000-3200 from January 1, 1986, on recommendation of
Fourth Pay Commission. They continued to have the
privileges and facilities of Group B Officers of Indian
Railway. In 1987, consequent to the revision of pay scales
of Railway posts, on recommendation by the Fourth pay
Commission, the posts under Indian Railways were re-
classified. Posts in scale of Rs. 2000-3200 were classified
as Group ’C’ instead of Group B. In 1989, the Railway Board,
in view of restructuring of cadre of Indian Audit and
Accounts Department, creation of posts of A.A.Os in scale of
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 8
Rs. 2000-3200, classified as Group B- Gazetted status,
issued instructions that Audit Officers in Scale of Rs.
2000-3200 may
297
be given privileges and facilities viz Passes/P.T.0s.
Quarters etc, as admissible to Railway employees in
identical scale. Consequently they were not entitled to the
privileges and facilities admissible to gazetted Railway
Officers. classified in Group B in scale of Rs. 2000-3500.
However, Assistant Audit Officers given Gazetted status
between March 1, 1984, and December 31, 1985 were allowed to
continue to enjoy the facilities of Passes/p.T.Os quarters
etc. Petitioners filed application before the Central
Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, claiming that
Assistant Audit Officers, given Gazetted status Group B
after December 31, 1985, were also entitled to the
privileges and facilities admissible to Railway Officers,
classified ’Group B’. The application was rejected by the
Tribunal and the Petitions filed Special Leave petition
seeking redressal.
This Court dismissed the special leave petition and,
HELD: That conferring special privileges and facilities,
to Assistant Audit Officers, which are not provided to
Railway servants in identical pay scale would lead to unjust
results. It would result in conferring special privileges
and facilities, by the Indian Railways to persons belonging
to foreign department of Controller and Auditor General of
India, while their own servants, who hold equivalent posts
on the same scale of pay will be denied such privileges and
facilities. The Railway Board’s letter dated April 14, 1960
also shows that the staff of the Railway Audit Department is
treated more generously than the officers (if the same Audit
Department in matters of issuance of Passes/P.T.0s. The
Assistant Audit Officers, who had been given status of
gazetted Group B, by the comptroller and Audit General,
cannot be treated, by the Indian Railways on par, with
Railway servants, classified group B. In matters relating to
conferring privileges and giving of facilities. The Railway
Servant (Pass) Rules, 1986, made in Consonance with
classification of Railway servants, rightly made by the
President of India, consequent upon the Railway services
(Revised Pay) Rules, 1986, issued under the proviso to
Article 309 of the Constitution, confer facilities and
privileges according to class to which Railway servants
belong, they can not be treated as Rules violative of
Article 14 of the Constitution. Nor can they be regarded as
arbitrary. (303-C, 304-G)
That even if discrimination was brought about by the
Railways in regard to officers of the same category, that
is, Assist-Ant Audit Officers, such discriminatory treatment
accorded to a small number cannot be availed of by the
Petitioners, to obtain she benefit of such wrongly conferred
privileges and facilities. However, this Court did not
consider it appropriate to pronounce
298
upon the correctness of the conferment of such privileges
and facilities to the Assistant Audit Officers, given status
of Gazetted Group B between March 1, 1984 and December 31,
1985, when they had not been impleaded as party respondents.
(305-A-C)
JUDGMENT:
CIVIL APPELLATE-JURISDICTION: Special Leave Petition (Civil)
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 8
No. 10784 of 1992 etc. etc.
From the judgment and Order dated 13.3.1992 of the Central
Administrative Tribunal, New Delhi in O.A. No. 262 of 1991.
M. K. Ramamoorthy, H.S. Gururaja Rao, R. Venkataramani, S.M.
Garg, T.L. Roy, T.V. Ratnam, E.X. Joseph, D.N. Paul and M.M.
Kashyap for the Petitioners.
D.N. Dwivedi, Addl. Solicitor General, V.K. Verma and Ms.
Ameeka Singh for the Respondents.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
VENKATACHALA,J. In these Special Leave Petitions, we are
concerned with the Grievance of the employees belonging to
the office of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India,
working in the Railway Audit Department. These employees
who were Section Officers prior to 1st March, 1984, got
promotion from that day as Assistant Audit Officers on a
pay-scale of Rs. 650-30-740-35800-EB-40-1040 and were
designated as Officers ’Group-B Gazetted’. On the
recommendations of the Fourth Pay Commission; the said pay-
scale of Assistant Audit Officers was revised to Rs. 2,000-
3,200 from 1st January, 1986. The grievance of the
Assistant Audit Officers-Group B Gazetted, is that the
Indian Railways should not have denied to them the benefits,
such as, issue of Railway Travel Passes/P.T.0s., allotment
of Railway Quarters, giving of accommodation in Rest
Houses/Retiring Rooms, taking of family members while on
tour, etc. admissible to Group-B Gazetted Officers of the
Railways.
The Principal Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal,
to be referred to herein-after as "the Tribunal", which
examined the said grievance, rejected it by order dated 13th
March, 1992. The grievance, so rejected by the Tribunal, is
again ventilated in these Special Leave Petitions, seeking
redressal therefor.
Since the facts which have given rise to the grievance,
furnish the background, for examining its merit, it would be
advantageous to advert to them at the
299
out set.
The Railway Board in its letter No. E(G) 58PS5-20/1 dated
14th April, 1960, addressed to the General Managers of the
Indian Railways, spelled out its policy in the matter of
issuance of Railway Passes/P.T.0s. to the staff of the
Railway Audit Department including the Indian Audit &
Accounts Service Officers (IA&AS Officers) of that
Department, thus:-
i. The scale of Passes/P.T.0s. and the rules governing
their issue will be the same as applicable to Railway
servants from time to time.
ii. Passes/P.T.0s. to IA & AS Officers, if are to be issued
when they are proceeding on leave exceeding four months,
they should have completed one year’s service in the Railway
Audit Department and the Comptroller and Auditor General of
India ought to assure by declaring that the Officers
concerned will return to Railway Audit Department on the
expiry of such Officers’ leave.
iii. IA & AS Officers working in the Railway Audit
Department will pot be entitled to grant of certificates
which would entitle them to obtain travel concessions on
Railways outside India.
iv. Passes/P.T.0s. will be issued by the Chief Auditors
irrespective of home or foreign line.
It was mentioned in the above letter that the same was
issued with the sanction of the President of India. The
policy contained in the above letter was followed by the
Indian Railways for several years.
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 8
In the meantime, the Director of Audit, Central Railway, by
his notice dated 19th December, 1983, made it known that the
Central Government had, on the recommendations of the
Comptroller and Auditor General of India, sanctioned higher
scale of pay of Rs. 650-30-740-35-800-EB-40-1040 to 80 per
cent of Section Officers on the staff of the Railway Audit
Department and that scale of pay would become effective from
1st March, 1984. It was indicated in that notice that the
Section Officers on the staff of the Railway Audit
Department getting such higher scale of pay, will have their
designation as Assistant Audit Officers (Group B Gazetted).
Similar notice, it is said, was issued by the concerned
Director of Audit of every other Zone of the lndian
Railways.The said scale of the pay of the Assistant Audit
Officers (Group-B Gazetted) came to be revised as Rs. 2,000-
300
3,200 from 1st January, 1986 as per the recommendations of
the Fourth Pay Commission. Even then, the Assistant Audit
Officers who Were designated as ’Group-B Gazetted’ continued
to have the privileges and facilities of ’Group-B Officers
of the Indian Railways.
However, by its letter No. E(W) 87PS51/3 dated 27th July,
1989 addressed to all General Managers, Indian Railways, the
Railway Board referring to the creation of posts of
Assistant Audit Officers in the Railway Audit Department and
the incumbents in those posts having been given Group-B
Gazetted status, stated thus:-
"As a result of restructuring of the cadre of Indian Audit
and Accounts Department, a number of posts of Assistant
Audit Officers have been created in the scale of Rs. 2000-
3200 and classified as Group’B’posts carrying a gazetted
status. The eligibility of these officers to various
facilities as admissible to the Gazetted
Officers on Railways in scale of Rs. 2000-3500
has been considered but the same has not been
agreed to. It has been decided that the Audit
Officers in scale of Rs. 2000-3200 may be
given the privileges and facilities viz.
Passes/PTOs. allotment of Railway Quarters and
Rest Houses/retiring Rooms and taking family
with them while on tour etc. as admissible to
the Railway Employees in identical scale of
pay viz. Rs. 2000-3200."
The said letter shows that it had been issued with the
concurrence of the Finance Directorate of the Ministry of
Railways. But, the contents of the said letter were modified
by a telegram, which read thus:-
"No. E(W)87PS51/3. In partial notification of
Ministry of Railway’s letter of even number
dated 27.7.89 Ministry of Railway have decided
that the Assistant Audit Officers given the
Gazetted status between 1st March, 1984 and
31.12.1985 shall continue to enjoy the
facility of passes, PTOS. Quarters etc.
enjoyed by them as a result of conferring of
the gazetted status on them during the period
mentioned above (As personal to them.)"
The said telegram makes it obvious that those Assistant
Audit Officers in the Railway Audit Department who got
Gazetted status between 1st March, 1984 and 31st December,
1985, shall alone be entitled to the facilities of
Passes/P.T.0s., Quarters etc,and not those who got such
Gazetted status after 31st December,
301
Then, there is the letter No. PCIV/86/ Imp./46 dated 30th
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 8
October, 1987 issued by the Railway Board to the General
Managers of the Indian Railways, which shows that the
president of India had, consequent upon the revision of pay-
scales of the Central Government employees recommended by
the Fourth Pay Commission, reclassified all the posts under
the Indian Railways, thus:-
"Classification Description of Posts
of posts
------------------------------------------------------------
Group A All posts in scale Rs. 2200-4000 and
above.
Group B Posts in scale Rs. 2375-3500 applicable
to accounts Officers only and other
posts of Officers in scale Rs. 2000-
3500(all Deptts.)
Group C. All posts in scales Rs. 825-1200 and
above including posts of Post-graduate
Teachers (Selection Grade)/Head-
masters-
Middle School (Selection Grade)in
scale Rs. 2000-3500, Supervisors in
scale Rs. 2375-3500 and excluding
those mentioned for Groups ’A’ and
‘B’.
Group D All posts in scales Rs. 750-940, Rs.
7751025 and Rs. 800-1150."
----------------------------------------------------------------
The said classification of posts in the Indian Railways is
done, as becomes clear from the said letter, consequent upon
the introduction of Railway Services (Revised Pay) Rules,
1986. In this context, it would be necessary to advert to
the Railway Servants (Pass) Rules, 1986 made by the
President of India under the proviso to Article 309 of the
Constitution regulating the issuance of passes and
Privileged Ticket Orders to Railway servants. Meaning of
’railway servant for the purposes of the said Rules is given
in clause (h) of Rule 2 thereof,. thus:-
"railway servant’ means a person who is a member of a
service or who holds a post under the administrative control
of Railway Board and includes a person who holds a post in
the Railway Board. Persons lent from a service or post
which is not under the administrative control of the Railway
Board to a service or post which is under such
administrative control do not come within the scope of this
definition. This term excludes casual labour for whom
special
302
orders have been framed."
Schedule II of the said Rules contains the classification
(categorisation) of Railway servants into Group-A, Group-B,
Group-C and Group-D and refers to certain privileges
admissible to them. That Schedule, which provides for issue
of passes on privilege account to Railway servants puts
Group-A Group-B Railway servants in one category. Group-C
Railway servants are put in altogether a different category
for the purpose of issue of passes to them.
From the said facts, it becomes clear that the Assistant
Audit Officers in the Railway Audit Department, who hold the
posts on the pay-scale of Rs. 2,0003,200, although
designated as Group-B Officers, are not treated on par with
Railway servants of the Indian Railways in the category of
Group-B Officers, to wit, the Railway servants holding the
posts of Assistant Accounts Officers and other Officers on
the higher pay Scale of Rs 2,000-3,500. Therefore, the
obvious reason for denial of the privileges conferred upon
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 6 of 8
Group-B Railway Officers under the Railway Servants (Pass)
Rules, 1986, to Assistant Audit Officers of the Railway
Audit Department, was the latter holding posts of lower pay-
scale of Rs. 2,000- 3,200.
It was contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners
that the Assistant Audit Officers working in the Railway
Audit Department could not have been treated differently
from Group-B Officers of the Indian Railways in the matter
of issue of privilege Passes/P.T.0s. to them when the latter
No. E. (G) 58PS5-20/1 dated 14th April, 1960 issued by the
Railway Board with the sanction of the President, clearly
laid down the policy that scale of Passes/P.T.0s. and the
Rules governing their issue will be the same as applicable
to Railway servants from time to time. It was also
contended by them that the Railway Servants (Pass) Rules,
1986 issued by the President of India, since exclude the
Assistant Audit Officers from ’B’ category Officers, they
would be violative of Article 14 of the Constitution.
Lastly, it was contended by them that the decision of the
Indian Railways that the Assistant Audit Officers of the
Railway Audit Department, who were given the Gazetted status
between 1st March, 1984 and 31 st December, 1985, alone
shall continue to enjoy the facilities of Passes/P.T.0s.,
Quarters etc. has since resulted in denial of such
facilities to the Assistant Audit Officers who were given
the Gazetted status after 31st December, 1985, the same
(decision) is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution.
We are unable to find merit in any of the said contentions
urged on behalf of the Assistant Audit Officers in support
of their grievance, for the reasons which we shall presently
state.
303
The Assistant Audit Officers although working in the Railway
Audit Department, are the Officers who are appointed by the
Comptroller and Auditor General of India and work under his.
control and supervision. No doubt, the Railway Board, as
seen from its letter dated 14th April, 1960 adverted to
earlier, had decided to give to the staff and Officers
working in the Railway Audit Department the facilities
admissible to Railway servants of comparable status. It is
not for us to go into the question whether it was obligatory
for the Railways to confer such facilities on the staff and
Officers of the Railway Audit Department, who in reality
belong to the Department of Comptroller and Auditor General
of India, inasmuch as that question is not required to be
decided by us. When the said letter dated 14th April, 1960,
containing the Railway Board’s policy of issuance of
Passes/P.T.0s. is seen, it shows that the staff of the
Railway Audit Department is treated more generously than the
Officers of the same Audit Department in the matter of
issuance of Passes/P.T.0s. to them (Officers), in that, the
issuance of passes to the latter category is made subject to
certain restrictions. No doubt, when certain Section
Officers were promoted as Assistant Audit Officers and
conferred the status of ’Group-B Gazetted’ by the
Comptroller and Auditor General of India, such Officers were
treated notwithstanding their lower pay-scale, on par with
’B’ Group Officers in the Indian Railways as regards
privileges/facilities obtainable by them from the Railways.
But, when the scale of pay of the Assistant Audit Officers
of the Railway Audit Department was revised on the
recommendations of the Fourth pay Commission, the scale of
pay of the Assistant Audit Officers, who had been designated
as Group ’B’ Officers, by the Comptroller and Auditor
General of India, fell short of the scale of pay of the
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 7 of 8
Railway servants of the Railway Department classified as
Group ’B’ Officers by the President of India. It cannot be
overlooked that it is the President of India, who made the
Railway Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 1986, on the basis of
the pay-revision of the Central Government Servants, as
recommended by the Fourth Pay Commission and it is again the
order of the President of India, which classified the
Railway servants into Group-A, Group-B, Group-C, and Group-D
according to the minimum and maximum scale of pay of the
posts held by them. Indeed, it was not disputed on behalf
of the petitioners that the Assistant Audit Officers of the
Railway Audit Department who are on the pay-scale of Rs.
2,000-3,200 are treated on par with the Railway servants
(Officers) who are on the pay-scale of Rs. 2,000-3,200 in
matters of giving the facilities or conferring of
privileges. What has happened is that the Railway Servants
(Pass) Rules, 1986, when are made, certain extra privileges
relating to issuance of Passes/P.T.0s. are conferred on
Railway servants, that is, Officers in Group ’A’ and Group
’B’ However, Group ’B’ Railway servants, according to
classification made by the president of India, on revision
of their pay-scales are those whose pay-scales are Rs.2,000-
3,500. What is contended for on behalf of the Assistant
Audit Officers, is that the fact that their
304
scale of pay is lower then Rs. 2,000-3,500 as applicable to
‘B’ Group Gazetted Officers of the Railways should be
ignored and the status that is conferred upon them by the
Comptroller and Auditor General of India as Group B
Gazetted’ alone should form the basis to give them
facilities or confer privileges on par with ’B’ Group
Gazetted Railway servants.
The submission made on behalf of the Railways, was to the
contrary. According to the submission, the fact that the
Assistant Audit Officers in the Railway Audit Department, on
the pay-scale of Rs. 2,000-3,200, are designated by the
Comptroller and Auditor General of India as ’Group -B
Gazetted’ is not sufficient to equate them with Group-B
Officers of the Indian Railways who hold higher posts with
scale of pay of Rs. 2,000-3,500. If the Railways give the
facilities and privileges to the Assistant Audit officers,
who are not Railway servants, treating them on par with
Railway servants of Group ’B’ they could find no valid
reason to deny such facilities and privileges to the Railway
servants holding posts on the pay-scale of Rs. 2,000-3,200.
If that has to be done, the Indian Railways would be
required to extend similar facilities and privileges to all
Railway servants who hold posts in the Indian Railways on
the scale of pay of Rs. 2,000-3,200. It means extending the
benefits to thousands of Railway servants involving heavy
financial burden on the Indian Railways. We find that the
contentions raised on behalf of the Assistant Audit
Officers, are unacceptable in that, if accepted, they would
lead to unjust results of the Indian Railways conferring
special privileges and facilities upon persons belonging to
foreign Department of Comptroller and Auditor General of
India, while their own servants who hold equivalent posts on
the same scale of pay will be denied such privileges and
facilities. Therefore, there is substance in the
submissions made on behalf of the Indian Railways that the
grievance sought to be made out on behalf of the Assistant
Audit Officers lacks merit and calls to be rejected. We,
accordingly, reject the contention advanced on behalf of the
Assistant Audit Officers that they should be treated by the
Indian Railways on par with Railway servants classified in
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 8 of 8
Group ’B "in matters relating to the conferring of
privileges and giving of facilities. Again, when the
Railway Servants (Pass) Rules, 1986, made in consonance with
the classification of Railway servants, rightly made by the
President of Indian consequent upon the Railway services
(Revised Pay) Rules, 1986 issued under the proviso to
Article 309 of the Constitution, confer facilities or
privileges according to the class to which Railway servants
belong, they cannot be treated as Rules which are violative
of Article 14 of the Constitution. Nor can they be regarded
as arbitrary. Hence, the contentions raised on behalf of
the Assistant Audit Officers on the unsustainability of the
Railway Servants (Pass) Rules, 1986 based on Article 14 of
the Constitution, wan-ant rejection as those lack in merit.
305
Coming to the last contention, viz, that the privileges
given to and facilities conferred on the Assistant Audit
Officers, who had been given the status of ‘Group-B Gazetted
by the comptroller and Auditor General of India, between 1st
March, 1984 and 31st December, 1985, are discriminatory, all
that we would wish to say is that even if such
discrimination is brought about by the Railways in regard to
the officers of the same category, that is, Assistant Audit
Officers, such discriminatory treatment accorded to a small
number cannot be availed of by the petitioners to obtain the
benefit of such wrongly conferred privileges and facilities.
However, we do not consider it appropriate to pronounce upon
the correctness of the conferment of such privileges and
facilities on a small number of Assistant Audit Officers in
these petitions, when they are not impleaded by the
petitioners as party-respondents, in these petitions.
Hence, we reject the last contention, as well.
We, therefore, find no good reason to disagree with the
order of the Tribunal impugned in these Special Leave
Petitions.
In the result, we dismiss these Special Leave Petitions.
However,.in the facts and circumstances of the cases we make
no order as to costs.
ISG. SLPs dismissed.
306