A Railway Board letter has been uploaded on NFIR’s official website on 31.10.2011, which is pertaining to that penalty of withholding increments imposed under Vth CPC scales and operated in the VIth CPC pay plus grade pay. This is the reply letter to given, in order to NFIR raised some clarifications regarding the issue. In accordance with the Railway Board order issued on 31.03.2010, the Federation underlined the statement of ‘did not stipulate that in every case of appeal or revision petition submitted against the penalty of withholding of increment imposed under two different CPCs and mentioned their monetary loss greater than the previous scale.
We have reproduced the body of the letter for your ready reference…
Sub : Penalty of withholding increments imposed under Vth CPC Scales and operated in the VI CPC Pay plus Grade Pay – reg.
I am directed to refer to the Federation’s letter No.II/5 dated 1.7.2011 on the above subject and to state that Board’s letter of even number dated 31.3.2010 did not stipulate that in every case of appeal or revision petition submitted against the penalty of withholding of increments imposed under Vth CPC scale and operated in VIth CPC scales, the appellate or revising authority, as monetary loss greater than what he would have imposition of penalty under the Vth CPC scale. The intention behind letter of 31.3.2010 aforesaid merely was to sensitize the appellate and revising authorities regarding the greater monetary loss to the appellant or petitioner on account of the penalty because of higher fixation of his pay retrospectively form 1.1.2006 and take a suitable decision regarding the penalty.
2. RS(D&A) Rules, 1968 already provides at before disposing of an appeal or revision petition, the appellate and revising authority would also take a view regarding the quantum of the penalty imposed by the disciplinary authority, that is, whether the penalty imposed was adequate or inadequate or severe and to pass order confirming financing reducing or setting aside the penalty. It may therefore be noted that the no necessary that on consideration of an appeal or revision Petition, the appellate or revising authority, as the case may be, has necessarily to either uphold or reduce or set aside the penalty. It may as well enhance the penalty if so considered warranted in the circumstances of the case. Since the penalty imposed by the disciplinary authority could even be enhanced in appeal or revision petition issuing instructions as proposed by the Federation, which in wages automatic reduction of the penalty, would obviously be in violation of the ions of the extant rules. It is also not feasible to reopen cases of quasi judicial nature already decided because such a course is not permitted under the rules.
3. As state in para 2 above, onus is already there on the appellate and revising authorities that they take all relevant aspects including quantum of penalty into account before disposing an appeal or revision petition. These authorities also decide appeal/revision petitions in exercise of their quasi judicial powers. Hence issuing any instructions in the matter further to the instructions of 31.3.2010 is neither considered feasible nor warranted.