RBE No.25/2000: Irregular retention in service – Over-stay

No.E(G)99 RT1-1, dated 18.02.2000

Sub: Irregular retention in service beyond the age of superannuation.

1. Introduction
1.1 The rules regulating the age of superannuation or the terms and conditions of service provide for retirement from service of a Govt. servant on his attaining the specified age or after completion of a specified period of service. In all such cases, retirement is automatic and in the absence of specific orders to the contrary by the competent authority, a Government servant must retire on the due date. However, there have been instances of certain Railway employees being erroneously retained in service beyond the prescribed date of retirement. Most of the provisions contained in Master Circular No.9, dated 14.11.1990 (RBE No.205/1990) and the earlier restrictions referred to therein mention about the steps to be taken to avoid recurrence of such cases and taking disciplinary action for imposition of major penalty on the persons responsible for over-stayal of Railway servants in service and completion of formalities in the prescribed manner before making a reference to Board for regularization of the period of over stay which used to be regularized by Board as re-employment, there being no other alternative at that time.
1.2 With the issue of Board’s letter No.E(G)97 RT1-1, dated 07.07.1999 (RBE No.139/1999) the position has undergone a change making redundant most of the provisions relating to formalities to be completed before making references to Board. Hence, in supersession of the Master Circular No.9, dated 14.11.1990 (RBE No.205/1990) on the subject (including all other instructions), a revised and self contained Master Circular as below is issued herewith.

2. Preventive and remedial measures
2.1 It is necessary to ensure that the personal records of all Railway servants are maintained correctly and kept up to date. The officers/ supervisors should be made responsible to keep a check on the entries in the service sheet of the employees working under them in the month of January every year and prepare a list of those who are due to retire in that year.
2.2 After preparation of the list the Railway servants due retirement during the Year should be advised of the date of their retirement and their signature obtained in token of having been informed of the date of their retirement. All such list should be consolidated by the end of March of that year at the Divisional/ Headquarters level. There should be mandatory vetting of the list so prepared.
2.3 Although it is the responsibility of the administrative authorities concerned to ensure that the Govt. servants under their control retire on the due date, of Govt. servant cannot take advantage of the non-receipt of formal orders to this effect, as it is his duty also to bring the fact that he is attaining the age of superannuation, to the notice of the Head of the Office in which he is working.
2.4 Instructions exist that advanced action should be initiated two years before an employee is due to retire, to process the papers for sanction of pensionary benefits. The intention behind these instructions is that, apart from providing for the prompt payment and settlement dues, it will also provide the opportunity to locate and assemble the relevant records and to rectify deficiencies, if any, existing in the personal records.
2.5 One of the reasons for irregular retention beyond the age of retirement is the order brought by Railway servant from the Court(s) of Law against their retirement on the basis of the date of their birth recorded in the service book. It is essential in such cases that the date of birth, as recorded in the service register of the Railway servant, is brought to his notice, with the advice that the date of his birth as recorded in the service register having been accepted by him, is final and is not open to challenge in a Court of Law. However, if a case is filed by a Railway servant in a Court of Law, no effort should be spared in getting the proceedings expedited.
2.6 Preventive checks may be got conducted by the DRMs, CPOs and FA&CAOs by nominating officers in various units to have 100% check of service records, particularly date of appointment, date of birth (to be written both in words and figures) and date of retirement, once in three years. The nominated officer should record a Certificate regarding the accuracy of the records checked. The mandatory area of inspection should include check and cross-check of service records along with other related official records.
2.7 Computerization of service records be done which should have an application to take care of these situations.

3. Disciplinary action for the lapses
3.1 In all cases of over-stayal in service beyond the age of superannuation, a thorough investigation should be done keeping in view the various steps suggested for prevention of such cases and responsibility should be fixed for the lapses of the officers/ staff leading to such cases. The officers/ staff responsible should be taken up under RS (D&A) Rules, 1968 for imposition of a major penalty. The penalty imposed should have a deterrent effect.
3.2 Guidelines may be issued to the Disciplinary Authorities that penalties imposed on the officials responsible for the lapses leading to irregular retention in service should only be major penalties.

4. Treatment of access period of stay
4.1 In the light of judgment of Supreme Court in the case of Radha Kishun vs. Union of India and others (SLP (C) No.3721 of 1997 arising out of judgment dated 26.11.1996 of CAT/Patna in OA No.652 of 1995), the matter has been considered by Ministry of Railways regarding treatment of period of over-stay. Taking into account Supreme Court’s view that an employee is to be considered an equally responsible for over-stay in service, Codal provisions had been made vide Board’s letter No.E(G)97 RT1-1, dated 07.07.1999 (RBE No.139/1999), circulating Advanced Correction Slip No.44, by incorporating sub-rule (d) in Rule 1801 R-II (1987 Edition), in terms of which such period of ovary-stay is to be treated as irregular and the pay/ allowances etc. allowed for the period of over-stay have to be recovered.

5. Necessary action for immediate settlement of the employee irregularly retained in service beyond the age of superannuation may, therefore be taken by the Railway in terms of Rule 1801(d) R-II, besides taking disciplinary action against the persons responsible for the lapse, should such cases arise despite the steps mentioned in the foregoing paragraph. Since Codal provisions has been made for the treatment of the excess period of over-stay as irregular. Railway may finalize such cases at their end and there is no need to refer such cases to Board’s office.

6. This issues with the concurrence of the Finance Directorate of the Ministry of Railways.

Download Railway Board Circular RBE No.25/2000

Forward reference⇒RBE No. 136/2019