CAT Orders Eligible Dues For Railway Retiree, Says His Accepted 2022 Voluntary Exit Could Not Later Be Treated As Void

In brief

The question

1. Whether the respondents could treat the applicant’s accepted voluntary exit as null and void, and require him to rejoin or resign, after his service had been terminated under the memorandum dated 28 June 2022.

The court held

The Tribunal allowed the O.A. and directed the competent respondent authority to disburse the post-retirement benefits to which the applicant was entitled under the applicable rules within three months of receiving a certified copy of the order.

It also directed

It made no order as to costs.

01Facts

The applicant, an ex-serviceman, joined the South Eastern Railway as an Assistant Station Master in 2006.

In March 2022, he sought voluntary retirement, citing his age and cumulative Central Government service; the Railway accepted his request by memorandum dated 28 June 2022, effective 1 July 2022

¶ 3.1–3.3 · pp. 2–3

After receiving some NPS-related benefits but not other claimed retirement dues, he made representations seeking payment.

¶ 5.3 · p. 4

In May and June 2023, the respondents asserted that the acceptance was erroneous because he had completed only about 15 years and 6 months of regular Railway service, below the 20 years they considered necessary, and directed him either to rejoin or resign.

¶ 3.5 · p. 3

Following an earlier Tribunal order and the High Court’s remand for reconsideration, the respondents filed their reply in this proceeding.

¶ 3.6 · p. 3

02Issues

i.1. Whether the respondents could treat the applicant’s accepted voluntary exit as null and void, and require him to rejoin or resign, after his service had been terminated under the memorandum dated 28 June 2022.

¶ 3.5, 5.6–5.7 · p. 3, 5

ii.2. Whether the applicant was entitled to disbursement of the post-retirement benefits claimed, subject to the applicable rules.

¶ 2, 7 · p. 1, 6

03Law Applied

The respondents relied on Rule 12 of the CCS (Implementation of National Pension System) Rules, 2021, and Railway Board Master Circular No. 35, contending that 20 years of regular qualifying service was required for voluntary retirement.

¶ 6 · p. 5

The applicant argued that the Railway rule corresponding to FR 56(k) permitted a Group C employee to retire voluntarily on attaining 55 years and that the 20-year requirement did not apply to him as an NPS-covered employee.

¶ 5.5 · p. 5

The Tribunal did not decide the applicability or interpretation of those provisions; it relied on the operative acceptance memorandum and on equity and natural justice, reasoning that the respondents had discharged the applicant pursuant to an official order.

¶ 7–8 · pp. 6–7

Provisions in the judgment · 2 · Linked ones open on LawLens

Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 Section 5 Section 19

04Reasoning

The Tribunal treated the memorandum of 28 June 2022 as establishing that the competent authority had accepted the applicant’s voluntary exit effective 1 July 2022 and that his service stood terminated from that date.

¶ 7 · p. 6

On that basis, it considered the later communications asserting that the exit was invalid and directing him to rejoin or resign to be without effect.

¶ 7 · p. 6

Emphasising that the applicant had been discharged under an official departmental order, the Tribunal concluded that the respondents should release the post-retirement benefits to which he was entitled under the applicable rules.

¶ 7–8 · pp. 6–7

It did not resolve the parties’ competing arguments about the 20-year qualifying-service requirement.