OP (CAT) Nos.56 & 60 of 2015 (Kerala High Court)

**IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS** **&** **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K. BABU** **MONDAY, THE 08TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 17TH PHALGUNA, 1942** **OP (CAT).No.56 OF 2015(Z)** **AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN OA 180/272/2014 DATED 01-10-2014 OF CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,ERNAKULAM BENCH** ## **PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS IN O.A:** - **1 UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE GENERAL MANAGER, SOUTHERN RAILWAY, HEAD QUARETERS OFFICE, PARK TOWN P.O., CHENNAI-600003.** - **2 CHIEF PERSONNEL OFFICER SOUTHERN RAILWAY, HEAD QUARTERS OFFICE, PARK TOWN P.O., CHENNAI-600003.** - **3 DIVISIONAL PERSONNEL OFFICER SOUTHERN RAILWAY, TRIVANDRUM DIVISION, TRIVANDRUM-695014.** - **4 SENIOR DIVISIONAL FINANCE MANAGER, SOUTHERN RAILWAY, TRIVANDRUM DIVISION, TRIVANDRUM-695014.** - **5 RAILWAY BOARD REP. BY ITS SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF RAILWAYS, NEW DELHI-110001.** - **6 CHIEF MEDICAL SUPERINTENDENT SOUTHERN RAILWAY, RAILWAY HOSPITAL, MEDICAL BRANCH, PETTAH, TRIVANDRUM-695024.** - **7 DIVISIONAL RAILWAY MANAGER SOUTHERN RAILWAY, TRIVANDRUM DIVISION, TRIVANDRUM-695014.** **BY ADV. SRI.A.DINESH RAO, SC, RAILWAYS** O.P (CAT) Nos.56 & 60 of 2015 2 ## **RESPONDENT/APPLICANT IN O.A:** **K.S.GOPALAKRISHNAN S/O. SREEDHARAN, RETIRED LOCO PILOT (MAIL)/SOUTHERN RAILWAY/ERNAKULAM JUNCTION, RESIDING AT AYILYAM HOUSE, LBS ROAD, CHUTTUPADUKARA, PONEKKARA, AIMS P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-682041.** **R1 BY ADV. SRI.T.C.GOVINDA SWAMY R1 BY ADV. SMT.S.SYAMALA DEVI** **THIS OP (CAT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08.03.2021, ALONG WITH OP (CAT).60/2015(Z), THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** O.P (CAT) Nos.56 & 60 of 2015 3 ## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS** **&** **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K. BABU** **MONDAY, THE 08TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 17TH PHALGUNA, 1942** ## **OP (CAT).No.60 OF 2015** **AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN OA 180/266/2014 OF CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,ERNAKULAM BENCH** ## **PETITIONERS:** - **1 UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE GENERAL MANAGER, SOUTHERN RAILWAY, HEAD QUARTERS OFFICE, PARK TOWN P.O.CHENNAI - 600 003.** - **2 CHIEF PERSONNEL OFFICER SOUTHERN RAILWAY, HEAD QUARTERS OFFICE,PARK TOWN P.O., CHENNAI - 600 003.** - **3 DIVISIONAL PERSONNEL OFFICER SOUTHERN RAILWAY, TRIVANDRUM DIVISION, TRIVANDRUM - 695 014.** - **4 SENIOR DIVISIONAL FINANCE MANAGER SOUTHERN RAILWAY, TRIVANDRUM DIVISION, TRIVANDRUM - 695 014.** - **5 RAILWAY BOARD REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF RAILWAYS,RAIL BHAVAN, NEW DELHI - 110 001.** - **6 CHIEF MEDICAL SUPERINTENDENT SOUTHERN RAILWAY, TRIVANDRUM DIVISION, TRIVANDRUM PETTAH - 695 024.** **BY ADV. SRI.A.DINESH RAO, SC, RAILWAYS** O.P (CAT) Nos.56 & 60 of 2015 4 ## **RESPONDENT:** **U.BALAKRISHNAN KOYAN AGED 59 YEARS S/O.T.UROOTTY, [RETIRED LOCO PILOT (SHUNTING)],SOUTHERN RAILWAY, ERNAKULAM JUNCTION), RESIDING AT:HOUSE NO.45/1325 (FIRST FLOOR), KAYANIKKAL HOUSE, MAY I ROAD, THAMMANAM P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,PIN - 682 032.** **R1 BY ADV. SRI.T.C.GOVINDA SWAMY R1 BY ADV. SMT.T.N.SREEKALA** **THIS OP (CAT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08.03.2021, ALONG WITH OP (CAT).56/2015(Z), THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** O.P (CAT) Nos.56 & 60 of 2015 5 ## **ALEXANDER THOMAS & K.BABU, JJ.** ----------------------------------------------- ## **O.P (CAT) No.56 of 2015** [A _rising out of the order dated 01-10-2014 in O.A No.272/2014 of CAT, Ekm. Bench_ ] **&** ## **O.P (CAT) No.60 of 2015** [A _rising out of the order dated 20-11-2014 in O.A No.266/2014 of CAT, Ekm. Bench_ ] ----------------------------------------------- Dated this the 8[th] day of March, 2021 ## **JUDGMENT** ## **K.BABU, J.** These Original Petitions have been filed by the Union of India represented by the General Manager, Southern Railway, Chennai and its officers who were respondents in O.A Nos.272/2014 and 266/2014 on the file of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ernakulam Bench (hereafter referred to as “the Tribunal”). The respective applicants before the Tribunal are the respondents in the Original Petitions. As the issues involved are similar these two Original Petitions are disposed of by way of a common judgment. 2. The applicants were Loco Pilots working under the Southern Railway. During the periodical medical examination, the applicants were medically declassified. Subsequently they were charged against O.P (CAT) Nos.56 & 60 of 2015 6 supernumerary posts pending grant of alternative appointment. The applicants submitted representation for permitting them to retire as running staff. Their applications, seeking voluntary retirement, were accepted. But they were not given the emoluments of running staff on retirement. The decision of the official respondents was challenged by the applicants before the Tribunal. The Tribunal allowed the applications in their favour. ## **O.P(CAT) No.56/2015** 3. The original applicant was a Loco Pilot (Mail) in the Indian Railways. In a periodical medical examination for adjudging his fitness, he was medically declassified as per Anx.A2 communication dated 24-09-2012. He was found fit only in Bee-one, whereas classification required for a Loco Pilot (Mail) was Aye-one. He submitted Anx.A3 representation dated 09-10-2012 to official respondent No.7 in the O.A requesting that he be allowed to retire as running staff. 4. His application for voluntary retirement was accepted with effect from 01-12-2012 as per Anx.A4 communication dated 19-112012. No alternative appointment had been given to the applicant. Consequent to Anx.A4 communication, the applicant submitted 7 O.P (CAT) Nos.56 & 60 of 2015 Anx.A5 representation dated 06-12-2012 to the official respondent No.3 stating that his pension be fixed as if he retired as a running staff. The official respondents, however, issued Anx.A1 pension advice fixing his pay by adding 30% of his basic pay on being charged against supernumerary post. He expressed his option under Rule 17(ii) of the Railway Services (Pension) Rules, 1993. ## **O.P(CAT) No.60/2015** 5. The applicant was a Loco Pilot (Shunting) in the Southern Railway. He was medically declassified in a periodical medical examination as per Anx.A2 communication dated 30-09-2013 finding that his ophthalmic condition is Bee-one (visual) category with glass. Subsequently, the applicant submitted Anxs.A3, A4, A5 and A6 representations requesting for permitting him to retire voluntarily and stating that, he did not like to be placed in any alternative appointment. On 04-11-2013, the official respondents issued Anx.A7 Memo “fitting” him against supernumerary post with effect from 3009-2013 pending alternative appointment. Thereafter he was issued with Anx.A8 office order accepting his request for voluntary retirement and informing that his service would stand terminated on 08-11-2013. On 18-12-2013, the applicant submitted Anx.A9 letter O.P (CAT) Nos.56 & 60 of 2015 8 opting in terms of Rule 17(ii) of the Pension Rules. However as per Anx.A1 dated 22-01-2014 the applicant was denied the benefits of a running staff on the date of his voluntary retirement. 6. Both the applicants contended that as per Rule 49 of the Railway Services (Pension) Rules, 1993, they are entitled to the emoluments of a running staff, which is basic pay plus 55% of basic pay, on retirement. 7. The official respondents resisted the original applications and contended that, as the applicants were medically de-categorised they cannot be considered as running staff and accordingly they are not entitled to the benefits applicable to a running staff. The applicants are only entitled to 30% of the pay as pay element of running allowance. The official respondents relied on instruction No.RB/ESTT.No.138/2011 dated 05-10-2011 of the Railway Board (Anx.R1) and clarification dated 08-10-2013 of the Railway Board (Anx.R2) to substantiate their contentions. 8. After appreciating the rival contentions, the Tribunal directed the official respondents to consider the case of the applicants as if they were serving as Loco Pilots with all available service benefits including 55% basic pay to be reckoned as running allowance O.P (CAT) Nos.56 & 60 of 2015 9 for the purpose of calculation of their pay for the pension. 9. We have heard Sri.A.Dinesh Rao, learned counsel appeared for the official respondents and Sri.T.C.Govindaswamy appeared for the original applicants. 10. It is common ground that the original applicants, who were running staff, were charged against supernumerary posts after medical decategorisation. It is also common ground that they were not appointed in any alternative posts till their voluntary retirement. 11. The relevant provision, governing pensionary benefits for medically unfit Railway servants, is Rule 17 of Railway Services (Pension) Rule 1993, which reads thus: ## _**“17.Pensionary benefits to staff declared unfit.** -_ _If a railway servant is medically unfit for his post but is retained in service in an alternative appointment under the provision of the Code and subsequently becomes entitled to receive retirement gratuity or pension, he shall be given the option of accepting either of following, whichever he may, prefer-_ - _(i) the gratuity or pension which he would normally be granted with reference to his total service in both the spells of his service taken together,_ - _(ii) the sum of-_ - _(a) gratuity or pension which he would have been granted if he had been medically invalidated out of service instead of being retained in an alternative appointment at the end of the spell of his service; and_ - _(b) the retirement gratuity or pension which he would normally have been granted for the second spell of this service rendered in the alternative appointment:_ _Provided that if the total qualifying service of the railway servant in both the spells of service taken together exceeds 33 years, the qualifying service in the second spell shall be reduced by the number of years by which total qualifying service in both the spells taken together exceeds 33 years and ordinary gratuity or pension and death-cum-_ O.P (CAT) Nos.56 & 60 of 2015 10 _retirement gratuity for the second spells of service shall be calculated with reference to the reduced qualifying service so calculated.”_ 12. Both the applicants opted for the benefits provided in Rule 17(ii). The learned counsel for the official respondents relied on Anx.R1 and Anx.R2 instructions of the Railway Board to deny the benefit claimed by the original applicants. Annexure R1 instruction dated 05-10-2011 of the Railway Board says that, pay of medically decategorised running staff while they are kept on supernumerary post will be fixed based on their Pay-Band and Grade Pay plus pay element of running allowance as may be in force. Annexure R2 instruction dated 08-10-2013 says that when a running staff is medically decategorised and he is placed on supernumerary post, his pay is fixed after adding 30% pay element from the date he was medically decategorised and if such an employee who is no more a running staff retires voluntarily or on superannuation, his settlement should be done without any further reckoning of pay element. 13. Relying on Anxs.R1 & R2 instructions, the official respondents contended that, the original applicants cannot be treated as Loco Pilots with effect from the date of their decategorisation. 14. The learned counsel for the original applicants submitted that after medical decategorisation, the applicants were kept in 11 O.P (CAT) Nos.56 & 60 of 2015 supernumerary posts as if they had not been posted on alternative employment and they continued to remain as Loco Pilots. It is the contention of the original applicants that at the time of their voluntary retirement they were Loco Pilots. 15. The learned counsel for the original applicants relied on Anx.A1 Pension Payment Advice and Anx.A4 office order issued to the original applicant in O.P (CAT) No.56/2015 and Anx.A8 office order issued to the applicant in O.P(CAT) No.60/2015. In Anx.A1, in respect of both the applicants, the designation is shown as 'Loco Pilot'. In Anx.A4 and Anx.A8 also the designation, of the applicants, is shown as 'Loco Pilot'. Annexures A1, A4 and A8 were issued after medical declassification. Relying on those documents the learned counsel for the original applicants contended that the applicants retired as Loco Pilots. 16. The learned counsel for the original applicants relied on Ext.R1(a) letter dated 29-11-2016 of the Railway Board to substantiate his contentions. The relevant portion of Ext.R1(a) reads thus: > “ _**Sub: Pensionary benefits of medically decategorised running staff who opt for voluntary retirement. Ref: Board's letter No.E(NG)-2009/RE-3/9 dated 05-102011.**_ _++++++_ O.P (CAT) Nos.56 & 60 of 2015 12 _Vide DC/JCM item No.25/2004, PNM/NFIR item No.8/2015 and PNM/AIRF Item No.46/2012, recognised staff Federations have demanded that 55% of Pay Element be reckoned for computing retirement benefit for those running staff who have been medically decategorised and decide to take Voluntary Retirement instead of opting for redeployment in an alternative stationary post._ _2. The issue has been examined in Board's office, and it is observed that the issue is governed under the provisions contained in Board's letter referred to above. To address the specific aspect brought out by Federation, it has been decided that whenever a medically decategorised running staff governed by RS(PR)1993, who has rendered the prescribed qualifying service, opts for Voluntary Retirement either on his own or within a period of one month from the date of offer of the first alternative post, his pension may be computed with addition of 55% Pay Element. This 55% benefit will be reckoned after deducting the 30% Pay Element fixation benefit if granted already as per Board's letter dated 05-10-2011 referred to above.”_ 17. Annexure R1(a) communication says that, in the case of medically decategorised running staff who decided to accept voluntary retirement instead of opting for redeployment in alternative stationary post, their pension may be computed with addition of 55% pay element. 18. In the case of original applicants they had not opted for any alternative employment but they accepted voluntary retirement after they were medically decategorised. It is submitted that in view of Ext.R1(a) the original applicants are entitled to service benefits including 50% basic pay to be reckoned as running allowance for the purpose of calculation of their pay for pension. 19. It is mentioned in Anx.R1(a) that a clarification dated 29-11-2016 regarding pensionary benefits of medically decategorised O.P (CAT) Nos.56 & 60 of 2015 13 running staff who opt for voluntary retirement will take effect from the date of issue of the letter. The learned counsel for the Railways Sri.A.Dinesh Rao, on the basis of instructions from the official respondent, submitted that they have no objection in granting pensionary benefits to the original applicants in tune with Ext.R1(a). We are of the considered view that the norms settled as per R1(a), in respect of pensionary benefits of medically decategorised running staff who opt for voluntary retirement, should have governed the fixation of pensionary benefits in the case of the original applicants. 20. The learned counsel for the original applicants also relied on Sec.47 of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 and contended that the applicants could not be reduced in rank and they could be shifted to some other posts with the same pay scale and service benefits. 21. It is submitted that if the disability of low vision, as in the case of the original applicants, is acquired by an employee during his service, he is entitled to the protection contained in Sec.47 of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 (For short “1995 Act”). O.P (CAT) Nos.56 & 60 of 2015 14 22. The medical classification of Aye-one category is a visual standard required for a Loco Pilot. Bee-one is a classification which makes him unfit for the job of Loco Pilot. The learned counsel for the original applicants submitted that a declassification on the basis of visual standards is attributable to low vision, which is a disability as defined in Sec.2(i) of the 1995 Act. 23. The learned counsel for the original applicants contended that as per section 47 of the 1995 Act as well as the corresponding provision in the 2016 Act, no Government establishment shall discriminate against any person with disability in any matter relating to the employment and that no Government establishment shall dispense with or reduce in rank an employee who acquires a disability during his or her service. It is further provided that, if it is not possible to adjust the employee against any post he may be kept on supernumerary post until a suitable post is available or he attains the age of superannuation whichever is earlier, the learned counsel added. 24. The learned counsel for the original applicants relied on _**Kunal Singh v. Union of India and another**_ [2003 (4) SCC 524] to substantiate his contentions relying on Sec.47 of the 1995 Act. O.P (CAT) Nos.56 & 60 of 2015 15 It is submitted from the part of the original applicants that Anxs.R1 and R2 instructions of the Railway Board cannot have any effect in view of the mandatory provisions in Sec.47 of the 1995 Act. 25. There are no pleadings as to whether the 1995 Act was made applicable to the establishment of the petitioners or it was exempted under the proviso to Sec.47 (ii) of the 1995 Act. Though the original applicants have _prima facie_ established a case for getting protection under Sec.47 of the 1995 Act due to lack of pleadings on the applicability of the Act to the establishment of the petitioners this issue is left open. 26. We hold that, in view of the submission of the learned counsel for the Railways that, they have no objection in granting pensionary benefits to the original applicant in tune with Ext.R1(a) and, in view of our finding that the norms settled in Ext.R1(a) should have governed the fixation of the pensionary benefits to the original applicants, there is no reason to interfere with the findings of the Tribunal at the hands of this Court in exercise of the powers of judicial review and superintendence. 27. The original applications were allowed as early in 2014. The official respondents will refix the pension of the original O.P (CAT) Nos.56 & 60 of 2015 16 applicants in the light of the findings of the Tribunal within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. With these observations and directions the above Original Petitions will stand dismissed. Sd/- **ALEXANDER THOMAS, JUDGE** Sd/- **K.BABU, JUDGE** KAS O.P (CAT) Nos.56 & 60 of 2015 17 ## **APPENDIX OF OP (CAT) 56/2015** ## **PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT P1 EXHIBIT P1- TRUE COPY OF THE OA NO. 180/00272/2014 FILED BEFORE THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM BENCH.** **EXHIBIT P2 EXHIBIT P2- TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY STATEMENT IN OA NO . 180/00272/2014 FILED BEFORE THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM BENCH.** **EXHIBIT P3 EXHIBIT P3- TRUE COPY OF THE REJOINDER TO THE REPLY STATMENT IN OA NO. 180/00272/2014 FILED BEFORE THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM BENCH.** **EXHIBIT P4 EXHIBIT P4- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM BENCH 1ST OCTOBER 2014 IN O.A.NO. 180/00272/2014.** **ANNEXURE A1 TRUE COPY OF PENSION PAYMENT ADVICE BEARING NO. 0604209773 DATED 15.03.2013 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT.** **ANNEXURE A2 TRUE COPY OF LETTER BEARING NO. V/MD/84/I/UF DATED 24.09.2012 ISSUED BY THE CHIEF MEDICAL SUPERINTENDENT, RAILWAY HOSPITAL, SOUTHERN RAILWAY, TRIVANDRUM.** **ANNEXURE A3 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 09.10.2012 ADDRESSED TO THE 7TH RESPONDENT. ANNEXURE A4 TRUE COPY OF THE OFFICE ORDER BEARING NO. 74/2012/ELEC/OP DATED 19.11.2012, ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT.** O.P (CAT) Nos.56 & 60 of 2015 18 - **ANNEXURE A5 TRUE COPY OF OPTION DATED 06.12.2012 SUBMITTED TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT.** - **ANNEXURE A6 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 28.03.2013, ADDRESSED TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT BY THE ASSOCIATION REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT.** - **ANNEXURE A7 TRUE COPY OF LETTER BEARING NO. V/P.439/VI/VOL. I DATED 20.03.2013, ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.** - **ANNEXURE A8 TRUE COPY OF LETTER BEARING NO. P(S) 679/VI/RG/AILRSA DATED 24.06.2013, ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE SECOND RESPONDENT.** - **ANNEXURE A9 TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO. P 500/HQ/PEN/POLICY DATED 10.07.2013, TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT.** - **ANNEXURE A10 TRUE COPY OF P(S) 676/VI/RG/AILRSA DATED 26.07.2013, ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT.** - **ANNEXURE R1 TRUE COPY OF RAILWAY BOARD'S LETTER NO. E(NG) I- 2009/RE-3/9 DATED 05.10.2011 (RB/ESTT. NO. 138/2011).** - **ANNEXURE R2 TRUE COPY OF RAILWAY BOARD'S LETTER NO. E(P &A) II-2004/RS-5 DATED 8.10.2013.** - **RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT R1(A) A TRUE COPY OF RAILWAY BOARD ORDER BEARING RBE NO. 137/2016 DATED 29.11.2016.** O.P (CAT) Nos.56 & 60 of 2015 19 ## **APPENDIX OF OP (CAT) 60/2015** ## **PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT P1 EXT.P-1: TRUE COPY OF THE O.A.180/00266/2014 ON THE FILES OF THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM BENCH. EXHIBIT P2 EXT.P-2: TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY STATEMENT FILED BY THE PETITIONERS HEREIN IN O.A. 180/00266/2014 ON THE FILES OF THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM BENCH. EXHIBIT P3 EXT.P-3: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 20TH NOVEMBER 2014 IN 180/00266/2014 PASSED BY THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM BENCH. ANNEXURE A1 TRUE COPY OF PENSION PAYMENT ADVICE BEARING NO. 0604210385 DATED 22.01.2014 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT. ANNEXURE A2 TRUE COPY OF LETTER BERING NO. V/MD/84/I/UF/DATED 30.09.2013 ISSUED BY THE CHIEF MEDICAL SUPERINTENDENT RAILWAY HOSPITAL, SOUTHERN RAILWAY, TRIVANDRUM. ANNEXURE A3 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 02.10.2013 ADDRESSED TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT. ANNEXURE A4 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 07.10.2013 ADDRESSED TO THE 6TH RESPONDENT. ANNEXURE A5 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 31.10.2013 SUBMITTED TO THE 6TH RESPONDENT. ANNEXURE A6 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 02.11.2013 ADDRESSED TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT.** O.P (CAT) Nos.56 & 60 of 2015 20 **ANNEXURE A7 TRUE COPY OF MEMORANDUM BEARING NO. V/P.439/VI/VOL. 1 DATED 04.11.2013, ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.** - **ANNEXURE A8 TRUE COPY OF OFFICE ORDER BEARING NO. 69/2013/ELEC./OP DATED 07.11.2013, ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE THIRD RESPONDENT.** - **ANNEXURE A9 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 18.12.2013 ADDRESSED TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT.** - **ANNEXURE A10 TRUE COPY OF MEMORANDUM BERING NO. V/P.524/V/RG/ FIXATION/VOL. VII DATED 05.11.2013 ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT.** - **ANNEXURE R1 TRUE COPY OF RAILWAY BOARD'S LETTER NO. E (NG) -I, 2009/RE-3/9 DATED 5.10.2011 RB/ESTT. NO. 138/2011).** **ANNEXURE R2 TRUE COPY OF RAILWAY BOARD'S LETTER NO. E (P AND A) 11-2004/RS-5 DATED 8.10.2013.** **RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT R1 A A TRUE COPY OF RAILWAY BOARD ORDER BERING RBE NO. 137/2016 DATED 29.11.2016.**