Actual discharge of higher-post duties entitles an employee to officiating allowance despite absent formal orders.

The applicant, a Railway employee, claimed officiating allowance for discharging the duties of a Travelling Ticket Examiner (TTE) from 20 February 1998 to 21 June 2006, before his regular promotion to that post with effect from 22 June 2006.

He relied on a letter dated 19 February 1998 assigning him TTE duties and contended that he had performed those duties on the directions of senior officials.

The respondents maintained that the work was assigned temporarily because of a shortage of senior staff and that no written Personnel Department order had been issued.

The applicant challenged the rejection of his claim by orders dated 30 January 2024 and 14 May 2024 under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985.

1. Whether the applicant was entitled to officiating allowance for the period during which he discharged TTE duties, despite the absence of formal written orders.

2. Whether the rejection of his claim should be set aside and the allowance paid, without treating him as regularly promoted or granting consequential seniority for that period.

Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 provides the procedural basis for an application to the Tribunal.

The Tribunal applied the Railway Board circular dated 26 May 1963, particularly paragraph 3, which permits officiating promotion from the date a short vacancy arose, or a suitable later date, even where formal orders are absent, provided the competent authority certifies that the employee actually discharged the full duties of the post; the circular also requires such cases to be scrutinised carefully and dealt with sparingly.

No judicial precedents were cited.

The Tribunal found that the applicant had in fact discharged TTE duties throughout the claimed period and that the CTI’s letter confirmed he had been sent to perform those duties on the oral orders of a senior official.

It considered the absence of formal Personnel Department orders insufficient, by itself, to defeat the claim, because paragraph 3 of the 1963 circular expressly contemplated cases without formal orders where performance of the full duties was established.

The Tribunal therefore held that the respondents’ stated ground for rejection could not sustain the impugned orders.

It directed the competent authority to pay the applicant officiating allowance for 20 February 1998 to 21 June 2006, with interest at 6% per annum from the date the amount became due until actual payment.

The applicant was not entitled to claim regular promotion or consequential seniority from 20 February 1998.

No order as to costs was made.