http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 8  

PETITIONER: CENTRAL RAILWAY AUDIT STAFFASSOCIATION AND OTHERS ETC.  ETC.

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: DIRECTOR OF AUDIT, CENTRAL RAILWAY AND OTHERS ETC.ETC.

DATE OF JUDGMENT20/04/1993

BENCH: VENKATACHALA N. (J) BENCH: VENKATACHALA N. (J) SAWANT, P.B.

CITATION:  1993 AIR 2467            1993 SCR  (3) 296  1993 SCC  Supl.  (3) 458 JT 1993 (3)   142  1993 SCALE  (2)577

ACT: % Railway Servants (pass) Rules, 1986: Facilities  and  benefits  of  passes/P.T.O,  Quarters  etc. allowed   to  Railway  officers  Group  B   category-Whether Assistant   Audit   Officers,  Group   B   Gazetted,   under Comptroller and Auditor General of India, working in Railway Audit   Department   also  entitled-Whether   exclusion   of Assistant Audit Officers Group B gazetted, in pay scale  Rs. 2000-3200,  from  Group  B  category  of  Railway   Officers violative  of Article 14 of Constitution-  Whether  allowing the benefits, only to Assistant Audit Officers given Group B Gazetted  status,  between March 1, 1984  and  December  31, 1985, is discriminatory.

HEADNOTE: Petitioners  were in service, under Comptroller and  Auditor General  of  India (C & AG for short),  as  Assistant  Audit Officers- (A.A.O. for short) Group B Gazetted, in pay  scale Rs. 2000-3200, and were working in Railway Audit Department, after December 31,1985.  In 1960, Railway Board spelled  out its  policy,  stating that scale of passes/P.T.0s.  and  the rules  governing their issue to staff of the  Railway  Audit Department  will  be  the  same  as  applicable  to  Railway servants.   However some distinctions were made  as  regards Indian  Audit  and  Accounts  Service  Officers  (IA  &   AS Officers) of Railway Audit Department, on recommendations of the  C & AG., Central Government sanctioned higher scale  of pay effective from March 1, 1984, for 80 per cent of Section officers in the Railway Audit Department to be designated as A.A.Os  (Group B-Gazetted).  Their pay scale was revised  to Rs.  2000-3200  from January 1, 1986, on  recommendation  of Fourth   Pay  Commission.   They  continued  to   have   the privileges  and  facilities of Group B  Officers  of  Indian Railway.  In 1987, consequent to the revision of pay  scales of  Railway  posts,  on recommendation  by  the  Fourth  pay Commission,  the  posts  under  Indian  Railways  were   re- classified.  Posts in scale of Rs. 2000-3200 were classified as Group ’C’ instead of Group B. In 1989, the Railway Board, in  view  of  restructuring of cadre  of  Indian  Audit  and Accounts Department, creation of posts of A.A.Os in scale of

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 8  

Rs.  2000-3200,  classified  as Group  B-  Gazetted  status, issued  instructions  that Audit Officers in  Scale  of  Rs. 2000-3200 may 297 be  given  privileges  and  facilities  viz   Passes/P.T.0s. Quarters   etc,  as  admissible  to  Railway  employees   in identical scale.  Consequently they were not entitled to the privileges  and  facilities admissible to  gazetted  Railway Officers.  classified in Group B in scale of Rs.  2000-3500. However,  Assistant  Audit Officers  given  Gazetted  status between March 1, 1984, and December 31, 1985 were allowed to continue  to enjoy the facilities of Passes/p.T.Os  quarters etc.   Petitioners  filed  application  before  the  Central Administrative  Tribunal,  Principal  Bench,  claiming  that Assistant  Audit  Officers, given Gazetted  status  Group  B after   December  31,  1985,  were  also  entitled  to   the privileges  and facilities admissible to  Railway  Officers, classified  ’Group B’.  The application was rejected by  the Tribunal  and  the Petitions filed  Special  Leave  petition seeking redressal. This Court dismissed the special leave petition and, HELD:     That conferring special privileges and facilities, to  Assistant  Audit  Officers, which are  not  provided  to Railway servants in identical pay scale would lead to unjust results.   It would result in conferring special  privileges and facilities, by the Indian Railways to persons  belonging to  foreign department of Controller and Auditor General  of India,  while their own servants, who hold equivalent  posts on the same scale of pay will be denied such privileges  and facilities.  The Railway Board’s letter dated April 14, 1960 also shows that the staff of the Railway Audit Department is treated more generously than the officers (if the same Audit Department  in  matters of issuance  of  Passes/P.T.0s.  The Assistant  Audit  Officers,  who had been  given  status  of gazetted  Group  B, by the comptroller  and  Audit  General, cannot  be  treated,  by the Indian Railways  on  par,  with Railway servants, classified group B. In matters relating to conferring privileges and giving of facilities.  The Railway Servant   (Pass)  Rules,  1986,  made  in  Consonance   with classification  of  Railway servants, rightly  made  by  the President  of  India, consequent upon the  Railway  services (Revised  Pay)  Rules,  1986, issued under  the  proviso  to Article  309  of  the Constitution,  confer  facilities  and privileges  according  to class to  which  Railway  servants belong,  they  can  not be treated  as  Rules  violative  of Article 14 of the Constitution.  Nor can they be regarded as arbitrary. (303-C, 304-G) That  even  if  discrimination  was  brought  about  by  the Railways  in regard to officers of the same  category,  that is, Assist-Ant Audit Officers, such discriminatory treatment accorded  to  a  small number cannot be availed  of  by  the Petitioners, to obtain she benefit of such wrongly conferred privileges  and  facilities.  However, this  Court  did  not consider it appropriate to pronounce 298 upon  the correctness of the conferment of  such  privileges and facilities to the Assistant Audit Officers, given status of  Gazetted Group B between March 1, 1984 and December  31, 1985, when they had not been impleaded as party respondents. (305-A-C)

JUDGMENT: CIVIL APPELLATE-JURISDICTION: Special Leave Petition (Civil)

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 8  

No. 10784 of 1992 etc. etc. From  the judgment and Order dated 13.3.1992 of the  Central Administrative Tribunal, New Delhi in O.A. No. 262 of 1991. M. K. Ramamoorthy, H.S. Gururaja Rao, R. Venkataramani, S.M. Garg, T.L. Roy, T.V. Ratnam, E.X. Joseph, D.N. Paul and M.M. Kashyap for the Petitioners. D.N.  Dwivedi, Addl.  Solicitor General, V.K. Verma and  Ms. Ameeka Singh for the Respondents. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by VENKATACHALA,J.   In these Special Leave Petitions,  we  are concerned  with the Grievance of the employees belonging  to the office of the Comptroller and Auditor General of  India, working  in the Railway Audit Department.   These  employees who  were  Section Officers prior to 1st  March,  1984,  got promotion  from  that day as Assistant Audit Officers  on  a pay-scale   of  Rs.  650-30-740-35800-EB-40-1040  and   were designated   as   Officers  ’Group-B  Gazetted’.    On   the recommendations of the Fourth Pay Commission; the said  pay- scale of Assistant Audit Officers was revised to Rs.  2,000- 3,200  from  1st  January,  1986.   The  grievance  of   the Assistant  Audit  Officers-Group  B Gazetted,  is  that  the Indian Railways should not have denied to them the benefits, such  as, issue of Railway Travel Passes/P.T.0s.,  allotment of  Railway  Quarters,  giving  of  accommodation  in   Rest Houses/Retiring  Rooms,  taking of family members  while  on tour,  etc. admissible to Group-B Gazetted Officers  of  the Railways. The Principal Bench of the Central Administrative  Tribunal, to  be  referred to herein-after as  "the  Tribunal",  which examined the said grievance, rejected it by order dated 13th March, 1992.  The grievance, so rejected by the Tribunal, is again  ventilated in these Special Leave Petitions,  seeking redressal therefor. Since  the  facts which have given rise  to  the  grievance, furnish the background, for examining its merit, it would be advantageous to advert to them at the 299 out set. The  Railway Board in its letter No. E(G)  58PS5-20/1  dated 14th  April, 1960, addressed to the General Managers of  the Indian  Railways,  spelled out its policy in the  matter  of issuance  of  Railway  Passes/P.T.0s. to the  staff  of  the Railway  Audit  Department  including  the  Indian  Audit  & Accounts   Service   Officers  (IA&AS  Officers)   of   that Department, thus:- i.   The  scale  of Passes/P.T.0s. and the  rules  governing their issue will    be  the  same as applicable  to  Railway               servants from time to time. ii.  Passes/P.T.0s. to IA & AS Officers, if are to be issued when  they  are proceeding on leave exceeding  four  months, they should have completed one year’s service in the Railway Audit Department and the Comptroller and Auditor General  of India  ought  to  assure  by  declaring  that  the  Officers concerned  will  return to Railway Audit Department  on  the expiry         of such Officers’ leave. iii.  IA  &  AS  Officers  working  in  the  Railway   Audit Department  will  pot be entitled to grant  of  certificates which  would  entitle them to obtain travel  concessions  on Railways outside India. iv.  Passes/P.T.0s.  will  be issued by the  Chief  Auditors irrespective of home or foreign line. It  was  mentioned  in the above letter that  the  same  was issued  with  the sanction of the President of  India.   The policy  contained  in the above letter was followed  by  the Indian Railways for several years.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 8  

In the meantime, the Director of Audit, Central Railway,  by his notice dated 19th December, 1983, made it known that the Central  Government  had,  on  the  recommendations  of  the Comptroller and Auditor General of India, sanctioned  higher scale  of pay of Rs. 650-30-740-35-800-EB-40-1040 to 80  per cent  of Section Officers on the staff of the Railway  Audit Department and that scale of pay would become effective from 1st  March, 1984.  It was indicated in that notice that  the Section   Officers  on  the  staff  of  the  Railway   Audit Department getting such higher scale of pay, will have their designation as Assistant Audit Officers (Group B  Gazetted). Similar  notice,  it is said, was issued  by  the  concerned Director  of  Audit  of  every  other  Zone  of  the  lndian Railways.The  said scale of the pay of the  Assistant  Audit Officers (Group-B Gazetted) came to be revised as Rs. 2,000- 300 3,200  from 1st January, 1986 as per the recommendations  of the  Fourth Pay Commission.  Even then, the Assistant  Audit Officers who Were designated as ’Group-B Gazetted’ continued to  have the privileges and facilities of ’Group-B  Officers of the Indian Railways. However,  by its letter No. E(W) 87PS51/3 dated  27th  July, 1989 addressed to all General Managers, Indian Railways, the Railway  Board  referring  to  the  creation  of  posts   of Assistant Audit Officers in the Railway Audit Department and the  incumbents  in those posts having  been  given  Group-B Gazetted status, stated thus:- "As  a result of restructuring of the cadre of Indian  Audit and  Accounts  Department, a number of  posts  of  Assistant Audit  Officers have been created in the scale of Rs.  2000- 3200  and  classified as Group’B’posts carrying  a  gazetted status.   The eligibility  of  these  officers  to   various               facilities  as  admissible  to  the   Gazetted               Officers on Railways in scale of Rs. 2000-3500               has been considered but the same has not  been               agreed to. It has been decided that the  Audit               Officers  in  scale of Rs.  2000-3200  may  be               given the privileges and  facilities      viz.               Passes/PTOs. allotment of Railway Quarters and               Rest  Houses/retiring Rooms and taking  family               with them while on tour etc. as admissible  to               the  Railway Employees in identical  scale  of               pay viz. Rs. 2000-3200." The  said  letter  shows that it had been  issued  with  the concurrence  of the Finance Directorate of the  Ministry  of Railways. But, the contents of the said letter were modified by a telegram, which read thus:-               "No. E(W)87PS51/3. In partial notification  of               Ministry  of Railway’s letter of  even  number               dated 27.7.89 Ministry of Railway have decided               that  the Assistant Audit Officers  given  the               Gazetted  status between 1st March,  1984  and               31.12.1985   shall  continue  to   enjoy   the               facility   of  passes,  PTOS.  Quarters   etc.               enjoyed  by them as a result of conferring  of               the gazetted status on them during the  period               mentioned above (As personal to them.)" The  said  telegram makes it obvious  that  those  Assistant Audit  Officers  in  the Railway Audit  Department  who  got Gazetted  status between 1st March, 1984 and 31st  December, 1985,   shall  alone  be  entitled  to  the  facilities   of Passes/P.T.0s.,   Quarters  etc,and not those who  got  such Gazetted status after 31st December, 301 Then,  there is the letter No. PCIV/86/ Imp./46  dated  30th

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 8  

October,  1987  issued by the Railway Board to  the  General Managers  of  the  Indian Railways,  which  shows  that  the president of India had, consequent upon the revision of pay- scales  of the Central Government employees  recommended  by the Fourth Pay Commission, reclassified all the posts  under the Indian Railways, thus:- "Classification       Description of Posts of posts ------------------------------------------------------------ Group A              All posts in scale Rs. 2200-4000 and                      above. Group B              Posts in scale Rs. 2375-3500 applicable                      to  accounts  Officers only  and  other                      posts  of Officers in scale  Rs.  2000-                      3500(all Deptts.) Group  C.             All posts in scales Rs.  825-1200  and                       above including posts of Post-graduate                       Teachers    (Selection    Grade)/Head-                       masters-                       Middle   School  (Selection   Grade)in                       scale Rs. 2000-3500, Supervisors in                       scale  Rs.  2375-3500  and   excluding                       those  mentioned  for Groups  ’A’  and                       ‘B’. Group D               All posts in scales Rs.  750-940,  Rs.                       7751025 and Rs. 800-1150." ---------------------------------------------------------------- The  said classification of posts in the Indian Railways  is done, as becomes clear from the said letter, consequent upon the  introduction of Railway Services (Revised  Pay)  Rules, 1986.   In this context, it would be necessary to advert  to the  Railway  Servants  (Pass)  Rules,  1986  made  by   the President  of India under the proviso to Article 309 of  the Constitution   regulating   the  issuance  of   passes   and Privileged  Ticket Orders to Railway servants.   Meaning  of ’railway servant for the purposes of the said Rules is given in clause (h) of Rule 2 thereof,. thus:- "railway  servant’  means  a person who is  a  member  of  a service or who holds a post under the administrative control of  Railway Board and includes a person who holds a post  in the  Railway  Board.  Persons lent from a  service  or  post which is not under the administrative control of the Railway Board   to   a  service  or  post  which   is   under   such administrative control do not come within the scope of  this definition.   This  term  excludes casual  labour  for  whom special 302 orders have been framed." Schedule  II of the said Rules contains  the  classification (categorisation) of Railway servants into Group-A,  Group-B, Group-C  and  Group-D  and  refers  to  certain   privileges admissible to them.  That Schedule, which provides for issue of  passes  on privilege account to  Railway  servants  puts Group-A  Group-B Railway servants in one category.   Group-C Railway servants are put in altogether a different  category for the purpose of issue of passes to them. From  the  said facts, it becomes clear that  the  Assistant Audit Officers in the Railway Audit Department, who hold the posts   on  the  pay-scale  of  Rs.   2,0003,200,   although designated as Group-B Officers, are not treated on par  with Railway  servants of the Indian Railways in the category  of Group-B  Officers, to wit, the Railway servants holding  the posts  of Assistant Accounts Officers and other Officers  on the  higher  pay Scale of Rs  2,000-3,500.   Therefore,  the obvious  reason for denial of the privileges conferred  upon

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 6 of 8  

Group-B  Railway Officers under the Railway Servants  (Pass) Rules,  1986,  to Assistant Audit Officers  of  the  Railway Audit Department, was the latter holding posts of lower pay- scale of Rs. 2,000- 3,200. It was contended by the learned counsel for the  petitioners that  the  Assistant Audit Officers working in  the  Railway Audit  Department  could not have been  treated  differently from  Group-B Officers of the Indian Railways in the  matter of issue of privilege Passes/P.T.0s. to them when the latter No.  E. (G) 58PS5-20/1 dated 14th April, 1960 issued by  the Railway  Board with the sanction of the  President,  clearly laid  down the policy that scale of Passes/P.T.0s.  and  the Rules  governing their issue will be the same as  applicable to  Railway  servants  from  time  to  time.   It  was  also contended  by them that the Railway Servants  (Pass)  Rules, 1986  issued  by the President of India, since  exclude  the Assistant  Audit Officers from ’B’ category  Officers,  they would  be  violative  of Article  14  of  the  Constitution. Lastly,  it was contended by them that the decision  of  the Indian  Railways  that the Assistant Audit Officers  of  the Railway Audit Department, who were given the Gazetted status between  1st  March, 1984 and 31 st  December,  1985,  alone shall  continue to enjoy the facilities  of  Passes/P.T.0s., Quarters   etc.  has  since  resulted  in  denial  of   such facilities  to the Assistant Audit Officers who  were  given the  Gazetted  status after 31st December,  1985,  the  same (decision)  is violative of Article 14 of the  Constitution. We  are unable to find merit in any of the said  contentions urged  on behalf of the Assistant Audit Officers in  support of their grievance, for the reasons which we shall presently state. 303 The Assistant Audit Officers although working in the Railway Audit Department, are the Officers who are appointed by  the Comptroller and Auditor General of India and work under his. control  and supervision.  No doubt, the Railway  Board,  as seen  from  its letter dated 14th April,  1960  adverted  to earlier,  had  decided  to give to the  staff  and  Officers working  in  the  Railway Audit  Department  the  facilities admissible to Railway servants of comparable status.  It  is not for us to go into the question whether it was obligatory for the Railways to confer such facilities on the staff  and Officers  of  the Railway Audit Department, who  in  reality belong to the Department of Comptroller and Auditor  General of  India, inasmuch as that question is not required  to  be decided by us.  When the said letter dated 14th April, 1960, containing  the  Railway  Board’s  policy  of  issuance   of Passes/P.T.0s.  is  seen,  it shows that the  staff  of  the Railway Audit Department is treated more generously than the Officers  of  the  same Audit Department in  the  matter  of issuance of Passes/P.T.0s. to them (Officers), in that,  the issuance of passes to the latter category is made subject to certain  restrictions.   No  doubt,  when  certain   Section Officers  were  promoted  as Assistant  Audit  Officers  and conferred   the   status  of  ’Group-B  Gazetted’   by   the Comptroller and Auditor General of India, such Officers were treated  notwithstanding their lower pay-scale, on par  with ’B’  Group  Officers  in  the  Indian  Railways  as  regards privileges/facilities obtainable by them from the  Railways. But,  when the scale of pay of the Assistant Audit  Officers of   the  Railway  Audit  Department  was  revised  on   the recommendations  of the Fourth pay Commission, the scale  of pay of the Assistant Audit Officers, who had been designated as  Group  ’B’  Officers, by  the  Comptroller  and  Auditor General  of  India, fell short of the scale of  pay  of  the

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 7 of 8  

Railway  servants  of the Railway Department  classified  as Group ’B’ Officers by the President of India.  It cannot  be overlooked  that it is the President of India, who made  the Railway Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 1986, on the basis  of the  pay-revision  of the Central  Government  Servants,  as recommended by the Fourth Pay Commission and it is again the order  of  the  President of  India,  which  classified  the Railway servants into Group-A, Group-B, Group-C, and Group-D according  to  the minimum and maximum scale of pay  of  the posts  held by them.  Indeed, it was not disputed on  behalf of the petitioners that the Assistant Audit Officers of  the Railway  Audit  Department who are on the pay-scale  of  Rs. 2,000-3,200  are  treated on par with the  Railway  servants (Officers)  who are on the pay-scale of Rs.  2,000-3,200  in matters   of   giving  the  facilities  or   conferring   of privileges.  What has happened is that the Railway  Servants (Pass) Rules, 1986, when are made, certain extra  privileges relating  to  issuance of Passes/P.T.0s.  are  conferred  on Railway  servants, that is, Officers in Group ’A’ and  Group ’B’  However,  Group  ’B’  Railway  servants,  according  to classification  made by the president of India, on  revision of their pay-scales are those whose pay-scales are Rs.2,000- 3,500.  What  is contended for on behalf  of  the  Assistant Audit Officers, is that the fact that their 304 scale of pay is lower then Rs. 2,000-3,500 as applicable  to ‘B’  Group  Gazetted  Officers of  the  Railways  should  be ignored  and the status that is conferred upon them  by  the Comptroller  and  Auditor  General  of  India  as  Group   B Gazetted’   alone  should  form  the  basis  to  give   them facilities  or  confer  privileges on  par  with  ’B’  Group Gazetted Railway servants. The  submission made on behalf of the Railways, was  to  the contrary.   According to the submission, the fact  that  the Assistant Audit Officers in the Railway Audit Department, on the  pay-scale  of Rs. 2,000-3,200, are  designated  by  the Comptroller  and  Auditor  General of  India  as  ’Group  -B Gazetted’  is  not sufficient to equate  them  with  Group-B Officers  of the Indian Railways who hold higher posts  with scale  of pay of Rs. 2,000-3,500.  If the Railways give  the facilities  and privileges to the Assistant Audit  officers, who  are  not Railway servants, treating them  on  par  with Railway  servants  of  Group ’B’ they could  find  no  valid reason to deny such facilities and privileges to the Railway servants holding posts on the pay-scale of Rs.  2,000-3,200. If  that  has  to  be done, the  Indian  Railways  would  be required to extend similar facilities and privileges to  all Railway  servants who hold posts in the Indian  Railways  on the scale of pay of Rs. 2,000-3,200.  It means extending the benefits  to thousands of Railway servants  involving  heavy financial  burden on the Indian Railways.  We find that  the contentions   raised  on  behalf  of  the  Assistant   Audit Officers, are unacceptable in that, if accepted, they  would lead  to  unjust results of the Indian  Railways  conferring special privileges and facilities upon persons belonging  to foreign  Department  of Comptroller and Auditor  General  of India, while their own servants who hold equivalent posts on the  same  scale of pay will be denied such  privileges  and facilities.    Therefore,   there  is   substance   in   the submissions  made on behalf of the Indian Railways that  the grievance  sought to be made out on behalf of the  Assistant Audit  Officers lacks merit and calls to be  rejected.   We, accordingly, reject the contention advanced on behalf of the Assistant Audit Officers that they should be treated by  the Indian  Railways on par with Railway servants classified  in

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 8 of 8  

Group   ’B  "in  matters  relating  to  the  conferring   of privileges  and  giving  of  facilities.   Again,  when  the Railway Servants (Pass) Rules, 1986, made in consonance with the classification of Railway servants, rightly made by  the President  of  Indian consequent upon the  Railway  services (Revised  Pay)  Rules,  1986 issued  under  the  proviso  to Article  309  of  the  Constitution,  confer  facilities  or privileges according to the class to which Railway  servants belong, they cannot be treated as Rules which are  violative of Article 14 of the Constitution.  Nor can they be regarded as  arbitrary.  Hence, the contentions raised on  behalf  of the Assistant Audit Officers on the unsustainability of  the Railway  Servants (Pass) Rules, 1986 based on Article 14  of the Constitution, wan-ant rejection as those lack in merit. 305 Coming  to  the last contention, viz,  that  the  privileges given  to  and facilities conferred on the  Assistant  Audit Officers, who had been given the status of ‘Group-B Gazetted by the comptroller and Auditor General of India, between 1st March, 1984 and 31st December, 1985, are discriminatory, all that   we   would  wish  to  say  is  that  even   if   such discrimination is brought about by the Railways in regard to the officers of the same category, that is, Assistant  Audit Officers, such discriminatory treatment accorded to a  small number cannot be availed of by the petitioners to obtain the benefit of such wrongly conferred privileges and facilities. However, we do not consider it appropriate to pronounce upon the  correctness  of the conferment of such  privileges  and facilities on a small number of Assistant Audit Officers  in these  petitions,  when  they  are  not  impleaded  by   the petitioners   as  party-respondents,  in  these   petitions. Hence, we reject the last contention, as well. We,  therefore,  find no good reason to  disagree  with  the order  of  the  Tribunal impugned  in  these  Special  Leave Petitions. In  the  result, we dismiss these Special  Leave  Petitions. However,.in the facts and circumstances of the cases we make no order as to costs. ISG.                                      SLPs dismissed. 306