R N GUPTA vs UPENDRA CHAND JOSHI, GENERAL MANAGER, N C R., PRAYAGRAJ & OTHERS

1

Open Court
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
ALLAHABAD BENCH, ALLAHABAD .
th
(This the 14 day of October, 2026)

CP No.176/2024 in O.A. No.331/2015

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Joshi, Member (Judicial)
Hon’ble Mr. Anjani Nandan Sharan, Member (Administrative)
1. R.N Gupta, aged about 68 years, S/o Late Bhagai Ram Gupta, R/o 410
Malviya Nagar, Prayagraj, retired as Mail/Passenger Guard from North
Central Railway Prayagraj.

2. Satya Prakash, aged about 68 years S/o Late Banshi Lal, R/o 1254 A
Kidwai Nagar, Allahpur, Prayagraj Retired as Mail Guard from North
Central Railway, Prayagraj.

3. J.C. Nand Srivastava, aged about 66 years, S/o Late Ramanand
Srivastava, R/o 91 Rambagh, Prayagraj, Retired as Mail Guard from
North Central Railway, Prayagraj.

4. Ramesh Chand, aged about 67 years, S/o Late Bechu Singh, R/o
83L/37P/2B Sulemsarai Nehru Park, Prayagraj, Retired as Mail Guard
from North Central Railway, Prayagraj.

5. Latif Ahmad, aged about 67 years S/o Late Manzoor Ahmad, R/o
36B/2L, Kareli Mastan Market, Prayagraj, Retired as Mail Guard from
North Central Railway, Prayagraj.

6. Ashok Kumar Upadhyay, aged about 68 years, S/o Late K.M.
Upadhyay, R/o 120F/1, Yusufpura Mau Nath Bhanjan, Prayagraj,
Retired as Mail Guard from North Central Railway, Prayagraj.

7. Ram Krishna Tripathi 111, aged about 66 years, S/o Late R.N.Tripathi,
R/o Mitra Nagar Duhussagaon Jhalwa, Prayagraj. Retired as Mail Guard
from North Central Railway, Prayagraj.

8. Jwala Prasad Pandey, aged about 68 years, S/o Late Ram Kishore
Pandey, R/o Village and Post Khajuri Koraon, Prayagraj. Retired as Mail
Guard from. North Central Railway, Prayagraj.
Neelam Kumari Singh

2


9. Ram Ratan, aged about 64 years, S/o Late Ram Sanehi, R/o Mohalla
Madhiyya, Shiv Narayan Ram Leela Road, Etawah-206001. Retired as
Guard from North Central Railway, Prayagraj.

10. Irfanur Rahman aged about 66 years S/o Hafizur Rehman R/o P/18
H.No 529/D/2 Dharam Kanta Kali Mandir, Adil Nagar West, Lucknow.
Retired Mail Express, from North al Railway, Prayagraj. Ce Kalyanpur

11. K.B. Srivastava aged about 67 years S/o Shri R.N SrivastavaR/o 95 F
Chakiya Rajroopur, GTB Nagar Prayagraj, Retired as Guard A Special
from North Central Railway, Prayagraj.

12. V.B. Singh aged about years S/o Late S.N. Singh R/o 127/62A U-Block
Narala Nagar Kanpur Retired as Guard Mail Express, from North
Central Railway, Kanpur Central.

…..Applicants

By Advocate: Shri Jaswant Singh

V E R S U S

1. Upendra Chand Joshi, General Manager, North Central Railway,
Prayagraj.

2. Jaya Varma Sinha, Chairman, Railway Board Ministry of Railways,
Government of India, New Delhi.

3. Himansu Badoni, Divisional Railway Manager, North Central Railway,
Prayagraj.

4. Manish Kumar Khare, Senior Divisional Personnel Officer, North Central
Railway, Prayagraj.

. . .Respondents

By Advocate: Shri Anil Kumar



Neelam Kumari Singh

3

O R D E R
By Hon’ble Mr. Anjani Nandan Sharan, Member (A)
Heard Shri Jaswant Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri
Anil Kumar, learned counsel representing the respondents.

2. The instant Contempt Petition under section 17 of the Administrative
Tribunal Act, 1985 was filed for non-compliance of the order dated
15.11.2018 passed in O.A. No.331/2015 whereby the following directions
were given:-
“….25. In view of the discussions above the prayer in the OA to
set aside the Railway Board circular dated 13.12.2012
(Annexure A-1) cannot be accepted in view of the judgment
dated 27.3.2018 of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union
of India and Ors. vs. Mukti Singha in Civil Appeal No. (s) 3321
of 2018, which is cited by the learned counsel for the
respondents. But as held in the judgment dated 27.3.2018 of
Hon'ble Apex Court, the benefit of MACP already allowed to the
applicants shall not be recovered from the applicants. Further,
following the judgment dated 19.7.2013 of Hon'ble Allahabad
High Court in the Writ-A No.18244/2013, we direct the
respondents to consider extending the benefit of financial
upgradation of MACP to the applicants who are eligible for the
some, in terms of the aforesaid judgment dated 19.7.2013 and
keeping in view the discussions in para 24 above.
26. All the OAs are partly allowed in terms of the directions in
para 25 above. There will be no order as to costs.”

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the order of this
Tribunal has not yet been complied with.
4. Learned counsel for the respondents states that pursuant to the
aforesaid directions, the respondents have filed a compliance
affidavits/supplementary affidavits on 01.10.2024, 04.10.2024, 11.11.2025
and 10.07.2026. In the supplementary compliance affidavit dated 10.07.2026
they have stated that the admissible MACP benefits, revised pay fixation,
arrears and other consequential retirement benefits have been paid to the
applicants. In support of their claim, the respondents have provided details of
the applicants’ appointments, promotions, pay fixation and grant of second
Neelam Kumari Singh

4

and third MACP benefits, along with revised Pension Payment Orders
(PPOs), pay fixation statements and due-and-drawn statements as
annexures.
4.1 The respondents had provided the details of the applicant’s
appointments, promotions, pay fixation and benefits granted to the applicants,
They contend that the revised pay, leave encashment, commutation of
pension and arrears have been duly calculated and paid, wherever
admissible. In support of their submissions, the respondents have provided
the details of the applicant’s pay-fixation statements, revised Pension
Payment Orders (PPOs) and due-and-drawn payment statements. They
further submit that, in certain cases, no further arrears or differential amounts
towards retirement benefits are payable. The respondents submit that all
dues have been fully paid as per the Tribunal’s order, nothing remains
pending, and, therefore, the contempt petition should be dismissed.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant states that the order dated
15.11.2018 passed by this Tribunal has not been fully complied with. In para
3 and 4 of his rebuttal affidavit he submits that the respondents have not
complied with the Tribunal’s order in its true letter and spirit and have failed to
provide proper due-and-drawn statements explaining the calculation of the
admissible benefits. They allege that the pay of the applicants, have not been
correctly fixed under the applicable Railway Pay Fixation Rules and MACP
provisions. According to the applicants, the respondents have failed to grant
the correct pay fixation, annual increments and the benefit of the third MACP
wherever applicable. Learned counsel for the applicant request directions for
correct pay fixation, payment of arrears and revision of retirement benefits.
He submits that even the gratuity has not been paid.
6. We have considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel for
the applicant as well as the respondents and perused the compliance
Neelam Kumari Singh

5

affidavit/Supplementary compliance affidavits and rebuttal affidavits placed on
record.
7. From the record, it is evident that the respondents have filed
supplementary compliance affidavit dated 10.07.2026, wherein it has been
categorically stated that the directions of the Tribunal have been complied by
issuance of a Pension Payment Order (PPO) on different dates. It is noted
from the PPOs that gratuity has already been paid to the petitioners and
pension had been revised. Revised pay fixation of all the applicants in
compliance of order dated 15.11.2018 of this Tribunal has been provided by
the respondents.
8. In view of the submissions made by learned counsel for the
respondents and the compliance affidavits/supplementary compliance
affidavits placed on record, we are of the considered opinion, that there has
been no willful disobedience of the order dated 15.11.2018 and the
admissible benefits in terms of the order have been extended to the
concerned applicants and the consequential arrears and retiral dues have
been paid. In view of the aforesaid compliance, no further action is warranted
in the present contempt proceedings. Accordingly, the Contempt Petition is
closed and consigned to record. Notices, issued to the respondents stand

discharged.
9. M.A., if any, stand disposed of, accordingly.


(Anjani Nandan Sharan) (Justice Rajiv Joshi)
Member-A Member-J
/ Neelam/
Neelam Kumari Singh