MASTER CIRCULAR No. 9 Irregular Retention InService Beyond The Age Of Superannuation CONTENTS CONTENTS Subject Letter No. Date Irregular retention ofRailway employees beyond the age of superannuation E (G) 78RT2/10 03.07.1978 Reiteration of Instructions to gear up administrative machinery to avoid such cases E (G) 78RT2/10 15.05.1981 Reiteration of Instructions to gear up administrative machinery to avoid such cases E (G) 82 RT2/17 25.02.1983 Procedure to regularise irregular retention beyond the age of superannuation E (G) 83RT2/12 25.08.1983 Reiteration of Instructions to gear up administrative machinery to avoid such cases E (G) 84 RT2/33 RBE50/85 16.02.1985 Reiteration of Instructions to gear up administrative machinery to avoid such cases and Disciplinary action against the defaulting staff E (G) 86 RT2/27 17.10.1986 Reiteration of Instructions to gear up administrative machinery to avoid such cases E (G) 86 RT2/38 RBE169/87 30.06.1987 Reiteration of Instructions to gear up administrative machinery to avoid such cases and Proforma to refer such cases to Board for regularisation E (G) 86 RT2/30 RBE209/87 11.08.1987 Retention in service beyond the age of superannuation-Regularisation of – withdrawal of power of GM E (G) 87 RT2/26 RBE 279/87 16.11.1987 Reiteration of Instructions to gear up administrative machinery toavoid such cases E (G) 87 RE2/10 RBE 288/87 27.11.1987 Other Railway Boards Orders on the Subject 1. Subject: Irregular retention of Railway employees beyond the age of superannuation. [No. E (G) 78 RT-2-10 dated 03.07.1978] Of late, it has come to the notice that a large number of references are being received from the Railway’s for regularisation of the irregular retention of the Railway employees beyond the age of superannuation. The major reasons indicated are: – (i) Wrong entry of the date of birth in the personal records; (ii) Non-availability of the records, and (iii) the employees having obtained injunctions from the law courts. 2.The periods of irregular retention differ in each case; in some cases it is more than5 years. Further references are also made very late for regularisation, i.e. in some cases, it has taken about8 years thereby putting the retiring Railway employees to lot of inconveniences in getting the retirement benefits. 3. Instructions exist that the names of the staff that are to retire should be published in the Gazette, one year in advance of their actual date of retirement. Further, in terms of the instructions contained in the Ministry of Finance O.M. No. F.11(3) EV (A)/76, dated28.02.1976, circulated vide Board’s letter No.F.(E)II 76 PN1/3, dated08.04.1976, as further clarified vide Board’s letter No. E (G) 76PNI-25, dated19.11.1976, advance action is required to be taken to initiate pension cases two years prior to the date of retirement. With these measures, the chances of Railway employees being retained in service beyond the date of superannuation should not arise at all. 4. The Railway Ministry, therefore, desire that the administrative machinery should be suitably tightened and personal record of the employees kept up-to date so that the eventuality of irregularly retaining the employees in service beyond the age of superannuation should not arise. Where it becomes necessary to approach this Ministry for regularisation, immediate action should be taken duly fixing the responsibility in each case, so that undue Hardship do not result to the retiring staff. 2. Subject:Irregular retention of Railway employees beyond the age of superannuation. [No. E (G) 78, RT2-10 dated 15.05.1981] Please refer to Railway Ministry’s letter of even number dated 03.07.1978on the subject noted above. On a review of the position concerning cases of irregular retention in service of Railway employees beyond the age of superannuation it has been observed recently that the number of such cases are on the increase. It has also been observed that references of the Railway Ministry are made very late for regularisation and that this causes lot of inconvenience to the retiring Railway employees in getting their retirement benefits. While drawing attention to the Instructions contained in Ministry of Finance’s O.M. No. F. 11(3) EV (A)/76 dated28.02.1976; circulated to the Railways vide Railway Ministry’s letter No. F (E) III, 76.PN.1-3 dated08.04.1976 as further clarified vide their letter No. E (G) 76.PN.l-25 dated19.11.1976 it was enjoined upon the Railway Administrations there in that the Administrative machinery should be suitably tightened and personal records of the employees should be kept up to date so that the eventuality of irregularly retaining the employees in service beyond the age of superannuation does not arise. It was further envisaged therein that if in any case it still becomes necessary to approach this Ministry for regularisation, immediate action should be taken duly fixing the responsibility for the lapse in each case so that undue hardships do not result to the retiring staff. 2.In the context of the recent increase in the number of cases requiring regularisation for irregular retention of Railway employees in service beyond the age of superannuation, the Railway Ministry desire that instructions already issued on the subject, as referred to above, should be strictly complied with. If in any case it still becomes necessary to approach this Ministry for regularisation of the cases of irregular retention of Railway employees in service beyond the age of superannuation whether it is because of any administrative lapse/reason or for some other reason responsibility for the lapse should invariably be fixed by the Railway Administration before making a reference of the Railway Ministry for regularisation of the case. It should also be specifically indicated in such a reference as to what steps have been taken by the Railway Administration to avoid recurrence of such lapses in future. 3. Subject: Irregular retention of railway employees in service beyond the age of superannuation. [No. E (G) 82 RT2-17 dated 25.02.1983] Please refer to Railway Ministry’s letters No. E (G) 78RT2-10 dated 03.07.1978 and15.05.1981, on the subject noted above. 2. On a further review of the position regarding the cases of irregular retention in service of railway employees beyond the age of superannuation due to administrative lapses/reasons, it has been observed that the number of such cases has still not decreased though the matter has been repeatedly brought to your notice during the last 1½ years. It has also been observed that the references to the Railway Ministry for regularisation of the period of irregular retention in service beyond the age of superannuation of railway employees are made very belatedly and this causes lot of inconvenience to the retiring/retired railway employees whose settlement dues are held up for long period pending issue of sanctions. 3.Attention is, therefore, again drawn to the instructions contained in the Ministry of Finance’s O.M.No. F.II (3) EV (A)/76 dated28.02.1976 circulated to the Railways vide Railway Ministry’s letter No. F (E) III76 PN1/3 dated08.04.1976, as further clarified vide their letter No. E (G) 76 PN1-25 dated19.11.1976 wherein it was enjoined upon the Railway Administrations that the administrative machinery should be suitably tightened and that the personal records of the employees should be kept upto date so that the eventuality of irregularly retaining the employees in service beyond the age of superannuation does not arise. It was further envisaged therein that if in any case it still becomes necessary to approach this Ministry for regularisation of the period of irregular retention in service of an employee beyond the age of superannuation the details about the responsibility fixed for the lapse in each case and the DAR action taken against the staff at fault should be indicated in concrete terms. It was also envisaged that in such a reference complete details about the steps taken by the Railway to avoid recurrence of such lapses in future should also be specifically furnished. 4.Despite these instructions the desired results have still not been achieved by the Railways in this regard and they continue to make references to this Ministry for ex-post-facto approval. The Board have noted this in a number of cases and they, therefore, desire that necessary steps in the matter should be taken immediately to avoid their recurrence, in future. 5.The details of the steps taken by the Railways to ensure compliance to these instructions should be furnished to this Ministry by 31.03.1983 positively. 3A. Subject:Irregular retention of railway employees in service beyond the age of superannuation. [No. E (G) 83 RT2-12 dated 25.08.1983] Please refer to Railway Ministry’s letters No. F (G) 78 RT2-10 dated 03.07.1978 and15.05.1981 and No. E (G) 82 RT2-17 dated 25.02.1983 on the above noted subject. 2.On a further review of the position regarding the cases of irregular retention in service of railway employees beyond the age of superannuation due to administrative lapses/reasons, it has been observed that the number of such cases has still not decreased though the matter has been repeatedly brought to your notice during the past two years. It has also been noticed that the references to the Railway Ministry for regularisation of the period of irregular retention in service beyond the age of superannuation of railway employees are made after considerable lapse of time and that this causes a lot of inconvenience and hardship to the retiring/retired railway servants whose settlement dues are held up for long periods pending issue of final sanctions. 3.Attention is, therefore, once again drawn to the instructions contained in the Ministry of Finance O.M.No.F.II (3) EV (A)/76 dated28.02.1976, circulated to the railways under Railway Ministry’s letter No. F (E) III76 PN1/3 dated08.04.1976, as further clarified vide their letter No. E (G)76 PN1-25 dated19.11.1976 wherein it was enjoined upon the Railway Administrations that the administrative machinery should be suitably tightened up and that the personal records of the employees should be kept upto date so that the eventuality of irregularly retaining the employees in service beyond the age of superannuation does not arise. It was further envisaged therein that if in any case it still becomes necessary to approach this Ministry for regularisation of the period of irregular retention in service of an employee beyond the age of superannuation, the details about fixation of responsibility for the lapse in each case and the DAR action taken against the staff at fault should be indicated in concrete terms. It was also envisaged that in such a reference complete details about the steps taken by the railways to avoid recurrence of such lapses in future should also be furnished in specific terms. 4.Despite the above mentioned instructions, the desired results have still not been achieved by the railways in this regard and they continue to make references to this Ministry for ex-post-facto sanctions to regularise the cases of irregular retention in service of railway employees beyond the age of superannuation due to administrative lapses/reasons. The Board have taken a very serious view of the matter and desire that necessary steps in the matter should be taken immediately by all the Railway Administrations to’ eliminate completely the recurrence of such cases in future. They also desire that preventive checks should be conducted by the Vigilance Organisations in the Personnel Department on the Railways Organisations. 5.The details of the steps taken by the railways to ensure compliance to these instructions should be furnished to this Ministry latest by 30.09.1983 positively. 6.If in any case it still becomes unavoidable to make a reference to this Ministry for regularisation of any case of irregular retention in service of an employee beyond the age of superannuation, it should be ensured that the reference made to this Ministry is complete in all respects and is made after fully complying with the requirements indicated in the preceding paragraphs and is duly vetted by the FA&CAO. Details pertaining to the employee who was at fault, his name, designation, nature of punishment meted out to him etc. Should also be furnished to the Board while forwarding such cases for consideration of the Board. 4. Subject:Irregular retention of Railway employees in servii beyond the age of superannuation. [No. E (G) 84 RT2-33 dated 16.02.1985; R.B.E. No. 50/85 Please refer to instructions issued from this Ministry from time to time on the subject noted above. 2.Based on a further review of the cases of irregular retention i service of Railway employees beyond the age of superannuation due l administrative lapse/reason, it is noticed that the instructions issued so for to minimise the occurrence of such cases have not proved fruitful. In fact the number of cases coming up to this Ministry has increased than what it was two years before. This shows that the instructions are not being followed an adequate attention and importance are not being paid. The irregular retention in service of an employee causes lots of hardship to him as the retiring railway servant, as settlement dues are held up for long periods, pending issue of final sanction after regularisation of the irregular retention. 3. As regards, the usefulness of the existing instructions issued so far is concerned, there appears to be no necessity to adopt new checks for avoiding occurrence of irregular retention in service beyond the age of superannuation. However, it is desired that the officer/supervisory staff should be made responsible to keep a check on the service entries in the service sheet of the individual staff working under them, every year in the month of January and bring out a list of such of the employees who are due superannuation during that year. This fact should invariably be brought to the notice of each employee and he should be asked to append his signature in token of having been informed of his date of superannuation. This list will be further consolidation at the Head Quarters and DRM’s office level to ensure that the complete enumeration of all the employees, who are due superannuation, have been made, by the end of March of the same year. A certificate in this regard be furnished to this Ministry by GM’s office, under the signatures of an officer not below the rank of Chief Personnel Officer, that the list of such of the employees as are due retirement in that year, has been compiled and the competent authority is satisfied with the compilation and correctness of the list. 4. It is noted with concern that the incidences of irregular retention in service on account of bringing Stay Order issued from the Court of Law, challenging the date of birth recorded in the service records of the employee, have increased in a large number and so long as the Slay Order is in operation, no process can be taken for superannuation of the employee, it is necessary, that the date of birth recorded in the service register may be brought to the notice of the employee well in advance, advising him that the date of birth as accepted by him, is final and shall not be challenged in the Court of Law. However, whenever, a case is filed in the Court of Law efforts should be made in consultation with the Law Officer of your Railway to get the proceedings of the case expedited by submitting the affidavit well in rime as and when desired by the Court of Law. 5.Instances have come to notice that when cases are referred to this Ministry for regularisation of irregular retention in service but information as desired in the instructions issued from time to time, do not accompany the proposal. Sometimes, the verbatim remarks of the FA& CAO and the Law Officer are not furnished when the retention has been caused by a legal process. In. the absence of these remarks, back references are made to the Railway Administrations, which causes further delay in the finalisation and payment of settlement dues, of the concerned employee. This should be avoided and proposal complete in all respects be made immediately, when any lapse has been noticed. The instructions also provide for taking disciplinary action against the employee who were responsible for these administrative lapses. But this is not complied with in many a cases. This should be done without any reservation. 6. The Railway Ministry desire that the instructions now being conveyed as well as those issued in the past should be complied with strictly and the preventive checks should be conducted on the basis of these instructions. A Certificate referred to in above paragraph be furnished to this Ministry by30.06.1985 positively, for this year but by 31st March forsubsequent years. 5. Subject:Irregular retention in service beyond the age of superannuation. [No. E (G) 86 RT2127 dated 17.10.1986] Attention is invited to the instructions issued from time to time by theDepartment of Railways, the latest vide letter No. E (G) 84, RT2/33 dated 16.02.1985 on the subject. If these instructions are fully implemented, the question of irregular retention of the employees beyond the date of superannuation would not arise. In fact a number of cases of irregular retention in service are coming to this Department for approval. It appears that the instructions arc not being followed and adequate attention is not being paid in the matter. The Department of Railways desire that the instructions issued from time to time in this regard should be followed strictly with a view to reducing the number of such cases to the minimum. 2.Further, the existing instructions also provide for taking disciplinary action against the employees who are responsible for the administrative lapses, it has been observed that the staff found guilty for administrative lapses are lei off by awarding very light punishment i.e. censure, stoppage of increment etc. The quantum of punishment imposed is far less as compared to the mistake/lapse committed. The Department of Railways, therefore, desire that the disciplinary action for major penalty should invariably be taken against the staff found responsible for administrative lapses. This would have deterrent effect on the staff. 6. Subject: Irregular retention in service beyond the age of superannuation. [No. E (G) 86 RT2-38 dated 30.06.1987; RBE 169/87] The question of eliminating the cases of retention in service beyond the age of superannuation due to administrative reasons has been engaging the constant attention of the Ministry of Railways and a number of instructions have been issued from time to time to the Railways on the subject. The instructions were reiterated to the Railways vide this Ministry’s letter No. E (G) 86 RT2-27 dated 17.10.1986. The instructions also provide for taking disciplinary action against the employees who are responsible for keeping the employees in service beyond the age of superannuation. If these instructions are fully complied with the question of irregular retention of employees beyond the date of superannuation would not arise. In fact a number of cases of irregular retention in service are referred by the Railways to this Ministry for approval. In some cases the responsibility is not fixed at all and if fixed, a very light penalty viz. Censure, stoppage of passes, stoppage of increment etc. is imposed which hardly serves as a deterrent measure. It appears that the instructions are not being followed strictly and adequate attention is not being paid in the matter. The Ministry of Railways desire that the administrative machinery should be further tightened up to ensure strict compliance of the existing instructions and preventive measures should be taken so that the number of cases of retention in service beyond the date of superannuation due to administrative lapses/reasons are reduced to the minimum and finally altogether eliminated. Disciplinary action for imposition of major penalty should invariably be also taken against the staff found guilty of administrative lapses and the punishment awarded should have deterrent effect on the staff. 7. Subject:Irregular retention in service beyond the age of superannuation. [No. E (G) 86 RT2-30 dated 11.08.1987; RBE 209/87] The question of eliminating the cases of retention in service beyond the age of superannuation due to administrative reasons has been engaging the constant attention of the Ministry of Railways and a number of instructions have been issued from time to time to the Railways on the subject. The instructions were reiterated to the Railways vide this Ministry’s letter No. E (G) 86 RT2-38 dated 30.06.1987. 2.Despite repeated instructions it has been observed that: (i) The number of cases being referred to the Board has not decreased. (ii) Cases are referred to the Board after considerable lapse of time without assigning valid reasons. (iii) Complete details as desired by the Board in their circulars issued from time to time are not furnished resulting in cross-references and consequent delay. (iv) Nature of disciplinary action taken against the staff responsible for the lapse is not indicated or such staffs are given some minor punishments, which do not have desirable impact or deterrent effect to improve their working. (v) Belated reference to the Board ipso facto delays in settling the dues to the staff concerned etc. 3. While the Board would like to reiterate and re-emphasize observance of the instructions issued by them from time to time on the subject, they desire that when such cases are referred to the Board, theRailway Administration should furnish the details relating to these cases in the proforma attached to facilitate consideration of the cases expeditiously. 4.Further, it is desired that effective steps should be taken to guard against the cases of irregular retention in service beyond the date of superannuation due to administrative reasons/lapses. Stringent action should be taken against the staff and officers responsible for the lapses. PROFORMA 1. Name of the employee; 2. Designation; 3. Date of birth; 4. Date of appointment; 5. Date-of normal retirement; 6. Actual date of final retirement; 7. Period of excess retention in service; Year- Months- Days 8. Brief history of the case (in a few lines) 9. Reasons for retention in service beyond the age of superannuation; 10. Whether responsibility has been fixed and if so what action has been taken against the staff held responsible; 11. Reasons for making belated reference to the Board; 12. Action taken against the staff responsible for delay; 13. FA& CAO’s verbatim remarks; 14. Railway’s recommendations/ remarks. 8. Subject:Retention in service beyond the age of superannua-tion-Regularisation of. [No. E (G) 87RT2-26 dated 16.11.1987; RBENo. 279/87] Please refer to this office letter No. E (G) 57 RT1-8 dated07.02.1958 in terms of which General Managers were authorised to regularise the period of retention in service beyond the age of superannuation upto the age of60 years in consultation with their FA& CAO’s. The matter has further examined in the Board’s office and it has been clarified that there is no delegation of powers to the General Manager in regard to the extension/re-employment beyond the age of superannuation. In this connection attention is invited to Board’s wireless No. E (P&A)1-83 EM1-3 dated04.02.1983 & Secretary, Railway Board’s D.O. letter of same number and date addressed to the General Managers. In view of the position stated above, the Board’s letter No. E (G)57 RT1-8 dated07.02.1958 may, therefore, please be treated as withdrawn. The cases of regularisation of retention in service beyond the age of superannuation should continue to be sent to this office as usual after complying with the instructions issued by the Board from time to time to the Zonal Railways on the subject. 9. Subject: Irregular retention of Railway Employees in service beyond the age of superannuation – Reiteration of Instructions to gear up adminstrative machinery to avoid such cases. [No. E (G) 87RT2-10 dated 27.11.1987; R.B.E. No. 288/87] The question of eliminating the cases of irregular retention in service beyond the age of superannuation due to Administrative reasons has been engaging the constant attention of the Ministry of Railways and a number of instructions have been issued from time to time to the Railways in this regard as shown in the margin. These instructions enjoined upon the Railways that the Service Records of the employees should be kept upto date and a list of such employees who are due superannuation during the year should also be prepared in the month of January. This fact should invariably be brought to the notice of each employee and they should be asked to append their signatures in token of having informed of their date of superannuation. The existing instructions also provide for taking stringent action against the staff/Officers found responsible for the administrative lapses leading to the irregular retention beyond the age of superannuation. On review of the matter, it has been observed that the instructions have. not achieved the desired results and a number of cases of irregular retention in service continue to be referred by the Railways to this Ministry for approval. In some cases the responsibility is not fixed at all and if fixed, very light punishment is awarded., Such cases are also referred to the Board’s office after a long gap of period which causes hardships to the retired employees. The Ministry of Railways have taken a serious view of casual approach to the problems by the staff/Officers in retaining the employees beyond the age of superannuation. 2. Ministry of Railways desire that the administrative machinery should be further tightened up to ensure strict compliance of the existing instructions and effective steps should be taken so that the number of cases of retention in service beyond the age of superannuation due to administrative lapses/reasons are totally eliminated. Serious view should be taken of the cases of the irregular retention and disciplinary action for imposition of major penalty should invariably be taken against the staff found responsible for administrative lapses and the punishment awarded should have a deterrent effect on the concerned staff. Procedure should be evolved to plug loopholes, which lead to the irregular retention of staff in service beyond the age of superannuation.
