Railways must freshly consider compassionate appointees’ OPS claims under subsequent pension instructions.

The applicant, a Senior Technician with Northern Railway, challenged the order dated 2 July 2024 rejecting his request to be shifted from the National Pension System (NPS) to the Old Pension Scheme (OPS).

The respondents maintained that he did not satisfy the conditions in the earlier pension-related instructions because he was called for a written test on 3 March 2004, after the relevant cut-off date.

The applicant relied on a DoP&PW Office Memorandum dated 22 June 2026, adopted by the Railway on 22 July 2026, which treated the date of application for compassionate appointment as the crucial date, provided the applicant was then eligible.

He sought quashing of the rejection order and placement under the applicable pre-2004 pension scheme.

Whether the applicant’s request for coverage under the Old Pension Scheme required fresh consideration in light of the subsequent instructions concerning compassionate appointments.

Whether the Tribunal should itself direct the applicant’s placement under the Old Pension Scheme, or remit the matter to the respondents for a fresh decision.

Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, provides the basis for the applicant’s Original Application before the Tribunal.

The Tribunal considered the DoP&PW Office Memorandum dated 22 June 2026, which provides that the date of application for compassionate appointment is the crucial date for pension-scheme coverage, where the applicant was eligible at the time of applying; eligible applicants who applied on or before 31 December 2003 are to be considered under the CCS (Pension) Rules, 2021.

The Tribunal also noted the Railway’s adoption of that memorandum and the earlier instructions relied upon by the respondents, including the O.M.s dated 25 June 2020 and 10 March 2023.

It did not determine the applicant’s ultimate entitlement under these instructions, but directed a fresh decision under the applicable rules and guidelines.

The Tribunal treated the 2026 instructions and their adoption by the Railway as a subsequent development relevant to the applicant’s case.

Although the respondents relied on the applicant’s post-cut-off written-test date and the earlier instructions, the Tribunal concluded that the case required reconsideration in light of the later guidance, which made the date of application for compassionate appointment relevant.

It therefore remitted the matter to the respondents rather than deciding the applicant’s entitlement to OPS itself.

The respondents were directed to complete the reconsideration within 45 days of receiving a certified copy of the order and to grant any consequential relief within 30 days thereafter.

No order as to costs was made.