KRISHNA BAHADUR PATEL vs RAVINDRA GOYAL, GENERAL MANAGER, N C R, SUBEDARGANJ, PRAYAGRAJ & OTHERS

1

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

CP No.125/2024 in O.A. No.1611/2013

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Joshi, Member (Judicial)
Hon’ble Mr. Anjani Nandan Sharan, Member (Administrative)

1. Krishna Bahadur Patel, aged about 65 years, S/o Late Hanuman Prasad
R/o 73/7/A Stanley Road Kamla Nagar, Prayagraj. Retired as Mail
Guard from North Central Railway Prayagraj.

2. Mohd. Akhtar, aged about 65 years, S/o Late Mohd. Mabud, R/o 12/14
Kanpur Road Prayagraj, Retired as Mail Guard from North Central
Railway Prayagraj.

3. Ram Lakhan, aged about 63 years, S/o Late Jokhu Ram, R/o 218D/4B
Jayantipur Preetam Nagar Prayagraj, Retired as Mail Guard from North
Central Railway Prayagraj.

4. Om Prakash, aged about 65 years, S/o Late H.S. Dwivedi, R/o 19A
Tignauta, Dandi Naini Prayagraj, Retired as Mail Guard from North
Central Railway Prayagraj.

5. Haseen Ahamad, aged about 62 years, S/o Late Shamsuddin, R/o 146
Meerapur, Prayagraj, Retired as Senior Goods Guard from North
Central Railway Prayagraj.

6. Rajesh Singh, aged about 61 years, S/o Shri Kat Singh, R/o 603A
Sadiapur Shastri Nagar Prayagraj.
Retired as Senior Goods Guard from North Central Railway Prayagraj.

7. A.R. Singh, aged about 65 years, S/o Ramjeet Singh, R/o 59/8, Labour
Colony, Naini, Prayagraj. Retired as Senior Goods Guard from North
Central Railway Prayagraj.

8. R.N. Patel, aged about 65 years, S/o Late Budhram, R/o 331 A/A-1,
Kamla Nagar Stanley Road, Prayagraj. Retired as Mail Guard from
North Central Railway Prayagraj.

9. Kamal Afsar, aged about 64 years, S/o Late Moinuddin, R/o 28 Pura
Manohar Dass Prayagraj, Retired as Mail Guard from North Central
Railway Prayagraj.

10. Ziaul Haque, aged about 65 years, S/o Late Fayazul Haque, R/o 620/2,
Noorullah Road, Nazi Nagar, Prayagraj, Retired as Mail Guard from
North Central Railway Prayagraj.

11. Afroz Ahamed, aged about 64 years, S/o Late Nanhey Miyan, R/o
39K/7C/1 Gaus Nagar Kareli, Prayagraj, Retired as Mail Guard from
North Central Railway Prayagraj.

Neelam Kumari Singh

2

12. Doodh Nath Ram, aged about 64 years, S/o Late Tulsi Ram, R/o Village
and Post Babatpur, Tehsil Pindra, District Varanasi. Retired as Mail
Guard from North Central Railway Prayagraj.

13. Mohd. Aslam, aged about 64 years, S/o Late Shaukat Ali, R/o
39/N/7N/C Gaus Nagar Kareli. Prayagraj. Retired as Mail Guard from
North Central Railway Prayagraj.

14. Ram Naresh Yadav, aged about 65 years, S/o Late Mewa Lal, R/o 42-
L/2G Saket Nagar Prayagraj. Retired as Mail Guard from North Central
Railway Prayagraj.

15. Sant Kumar Shukla, aged about 64 years, S/o Late R.N. Shukla, R/o
205/3K/1A/F, Karari Masari, Chakia, Prayagraj, Retired as Mail Guard
from North Central Railway Prayagraj.

16. Arun Kumar, aged about 65 years, S/o Late R.R. Sharma, R/o 75-A/21-
A, Kala Danda, Himmatganj, Prayagraj, Retired as Mail Guard from
North Central Railway Prayagraj.

17. Jagat Narain, aged about 63 years, S/o Late Shiv Balak, R/o 101 Mayur
Vihar Jhalwa, Prayagraj. Retired as Mail Guard from North Central
Railway Prayagraj.

18. M.R. Siddique, aged about 62 years, S/o Late M.R. Siddique, R/o
AF/111/5-A, Kareli Bazupur, Prayagraj. Retired as Mail Guard from
North Central Railway Prayagraj.

19. Abbas Husain, aged about 65 years, S/o Late Ashfaq Hussain, R/o
243/214, Dandipur Prayagraj. Retired as Mail Guard from North Central
Railway Prayagraj.

20. Mumtaz Ali, aged about 65 years, S/o Late Imam Ali, R/o 722/497, Atala
Prayagraj, Retired as Mail Guard from North Central Railway Prayagraj.

21. A.K. Pandeya, aged about 60 years, S/o Late B.D.S. Pandeya, R/o
416C Chak Raghunath Naini Pravagraj, Retired as Mail Guard from
North Central Railway Prayagraj.

22. Durgesh Nandan, aged about 62 years, S/o Late M.N. Srivastava, R/o
Arazi No.960 Bamrauli Uparhar Near Kalka Prasad School Prayagraj.
Retired as Mail Guard from North Central Railway Prayagraj.

23. Shashi Kant Verma, aged about 64 years, S/o Late Kamal Bihari Lal
Verma, R/o 9/5 Sarva Colony, Behind I.T.I. Naini, Prayagraj, Retired as
Mail Guard from North Central Railway Prayagraj.

24. Suresh Chandra Srivastava, aged about 63 years, S/o Late Amarnath,
R/o 454/294, Sultanpur Bhawa (Ganga Ganj) Prayagraj, Retired as Mail
Guard from North Central Railway Prayagraj.

25. Pradeep Kumar, aged about 63 years, S/o Late Mehi Lal, R/o 249-
A/172-A, Tularambagh, Prayagraj, Retired as Mail Guard from North
Central Railway Prayagraj.

26. Achint Kumar, aged about 61 years, S/o Late Nand Lal, R/o 55/K-17,
Bhawapur Kareli, Prayagraj. Retired as Mail Guard from North Central
Railway Prayagraj.


Neelam Kumari Singh

3

27. Rajeev Mishra, aged about 63 years, S/o Late L.D. Mishra, R/o 630 C-
Block, Shyam Nagar Kanpur, Retired as Mail Guard from North Central
Railway Kanpur.

28. A.U. Siddiqui Retired Mail Guard of N.C.R. Prayagraj, (Now deceased)
represented by his wife Smt. Nazia Ameen, R/o B-646/14 G.T.B. Nagar,
Kareli, Prayagraj.

…..Applicant

By Advocate: Shri Jaswant Singh

V E R S U S
1. Ravinder Goyal, 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

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
Neelam Kumari Singh

4

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 compliance affidavits on
30.04.2024, 11.11.2025 and 16.07.2026. In the second compliance affidavit
dated 16.07.2026 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 and third MACP benefits, along with revised Pension
Payment Orders (PPOs), pay fixation statements and due-and-drawn
statements as annexures. The respondents have explained the service
history, promotions, pay fixation and MACP benefits of the eight applicants
individually. They claim that the benefits have been calculated in accordance
with the Tribunal’s order, including adjustment of the additional increment
wherever applicable. In the case of Shri Afroz Ahmad, the respondents further
state that the benefit of the third MACP was granted with effect from
01.04.2016, considering the applicable benchmark and his APAR gradings.
The respondents have denied the applicants’ allegations regarding non-
compliance and contend that any alleged calculation error should be
supported by a comparative calculation sheet. 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.
Neelam Kumari Singh

5

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.
5.1 Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the respondents have
not provided proper pay-fixation and due-and-drawn statements explaining
how the revised benefits were calculated. Based on service records obtained
under the RTI Act on 06.01.2026, the applicants claim that their pay has been
incorrectly fixed, MACP benefits have not been granted from the correct
dates, and annual increments and notional increments have not been
properly considered under the applicable rules, including RBE No.95/2013
and Rule 13(i) of the Railway Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008. They seek
recalculation of salary arrears and retirement benefits, including pension,
gratuity and leave encashment, based on their claimed correct last basic pay.
The applicants seek correction of the respective pay records, payment of
salary arrears and recalculation of all consequential retirement benefits.
Learned counsel for the applicant request directions for correct pay fixation,
payment of arrears and revision of retirement benefits.
6. We have considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel for
the applicant as well as the respondents and perused the compliance
affidavit/Supplementary compliance affidavits and rebuttal affidavits placed on
record.
7. From the record, it is evident that the respondents have filed second
compliance affidavit dated 16.07.2026, wherein it has been categorically
stated that the directions of the Tribunal have been fully 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 applicants and pension had
Neelam Kumari Singh

6

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