Facts
The applicants, Timekeepers in various Time Offices at Kanchrapara under Eastern Railway, sought restructuring benefits under RBE No. 177/2003 and RBE No. 102/2013
Source reference: p.3, para. bHistorically, Timekeepers were treated as 'Workers' under the Factories Act by a 1970 Circular, differentiating them from Clerks, which led to various litigations for parity
Source reference: p.4The Tribunal in T.A. No. 41 of 1986 and T.A. No. 1489 of 1986 directed respondents to treat Eastern Railway Timekeepers similarly to those in Kharagpur Workshop/South Eastern Railway, Diesel Locomotive Workshop/Varanasi, and CLW, as a separate cadre with all admissible benefits under the Factories Act
Source reference: p.4This Tribunal allowed O.A. No. 1458 of 2000, extending 5th CPC recommendations with effect from 01.01.1996 to Kanchrapara Timekeepers, which was affirmed by the Hon'ble High Court and the Supreme Court
Source reference: p.5The respondents contended that the pay scale for Timekeepers for restructuring is no longer available and no restructuring benefits were given to them in 2003 and 2013
Source reference: p.7Further, the Time Office cadre at several workshops had merged with the Ministerial Cadre, with efforts to merge the remaining ones
Source reference: p.7Railway Board Orders dated 01.12.2023 and 11.01.2024 stated that restructuring benefits would apply from the date of merger with the Ministerial/Clerical Cadre, with the Eastern Railway's Time Office Cadre merging from 01.01.2024
Source reference: p.8, p.10The issue of restructuring for Time Office Cadre from 2003 to 2013 was previously considered by this Tribunal in O.A. No. 227/2013, which was allowed on 23.04.2015
Source reference: p.10The High Court in WPCT No. 166/2015 affirmed the Tribunal's order, noting the Railway Board’s circular dated 11.01.2024 established parity from 01.01.2024
Source reference: p.11Issues
1. Whether the applicants are entitled to the extension of restructuring benefits under RBE No. 177/2003 and RBE No. 102/2013 with reference to the sanctioned cadre strength as on 01.11.2003 and 01.11.2013 retrospectively
Source reference: p.3, para. b2. Whether the Railway Board Office Orders dated 01.12.2023 and 11.01.2024, to the extent of granting restructuring benefits only with effect from 01.01.2024, should be quashed
Source reference: p.3, para. cLaw Applied
The Tribunal primarily applied the principle of parity and equality before the law (Article 14 of the Constitution of India)
Source reference: p.11It relied on its own previous judgment in O.A. No. 227/2013 dated 23.04.2015, which determined that the Timekeeper cadre of Liluah Workshop could not be treated differently from other workshops regarding pay scales and restructuring benefits
Source reference: p.10The Tribunal also considered the affirmation of this principle by the Hon'ble High Court in WPCT No. 166/2015 dated 12.11.2025, which held that once parity is established, it should exist from the date the Tribunal ordered
Source reference: p.11Reasoning
The Tribunal noted that the issue of restructuring for the Time Office Cadre from 2003 to 2013 was directly covered by its previous decision in O.A. No. 227/2013, which was allowed on 23.04.2015
Source reference: p.10This decision explicitly stated that the contention of the respondents, distinguishing the Liluah Workshop's time cadre from its ministerial cadre for 5th CPC scales, was arbitrary and discriminatory, and that other workshops had granted similar benefits
Source reference: p.10The Hon'ble High Court in WPCT No. 166/2015 affirmed this, observing that the Railway Board's circular dated 11.01.2024, which directed restructuring from 01.01.2024, clearly established the parity between the Liluah Workshop and other workshops
Source reference: p.11The High Court further held that once parity is established, the Tribunal's direction for restructuring should stand, and interference was declined
Source reference: p.11Therefore, the Tribunal concluded that the instant case, involving the same issue of restructuring and parity, was squarely covered by these affirmed judgments
Source reference: p.12The Railway Board's argument that the RBEs were not meant for Time Keepers as a separate cadre and that benefits were extended in violation of Board's Order was not persuasive given the binding judicial pronouncements on parity
Source reference: p.9Holding
The Tribunal held that the applicants are entitled to receive the benefits of the aforesaid judgments, as the instant case is squarely covered by the Order dated 23.04.2015 passed by this Tribunal and affirmed by the Hon'ble High Court vide judgment dated 12.11.2025
Consequently, the Tribunal quashed the Railway Board Office Orders dated 01.12.2023 and 11.01.2024
Source reference: p.12The respondents were directed to extend the benefits of restructuring under RBE No. 177/2003 and RBE No. 103/2013 in favor of the applicants within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order
Source reference: p.12The O.A. was disposed of accordingly, with no costs
Source reference: p.12Original Court PDF
Suvenjit Kumar Chowdhury & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors. O.A. 350/00744/2024 with M.A. 350/01009/2024
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in