By Admin 
The Delhi High Court has expressed its disapproval over the “insensitive” approach of government authorities towards their employees, who bring recognition and honour to the country’s prestige through sporting excellence, by making them “run from pillar to post for what was legitimately due” to them.
The court was hearing a case regarding a boxer who was employed with the Railways seeking salary increments due to him.
“This Court cannot remain oblivious to the manner in which the respondent, a sportsperson who has brought recognition and honour to the country, has been made to run from pillar to post for what was legitimately due to him,” the court remarked in its October 29 order.
“This court expresses its strong disapproval of this practice and expects the petitioner authorities to hereafter act with fairness and respect towards their own employees who bring medals to the organisation, rather than forcing them into unnecessary litigation for recognition they have already earned,” a Bench of Justices Navin Chawla and Madhu Jain said.
The court’s remarks came while rejecting an appeal by the Centre, challenging a decision of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), which had directed the authorities to give two additional increments to a sportsperson along with arrears for his medal-winning performances.
The court also imposed a fine of ₹20,000 on the government.
The case relates to Ajay Kumar, a boxer who has represented India in international competitions and won medals at both national and international levels. Kumar was recruited in the Ambala Division of the Northern Railways in 2005, against the talent scouting quota reserved for sportspersons, with 17 advance increments awarded to him at the time of the recruitment.
In March 2007, Kumar won a silver medal in the 53rd Senior National Boxing Championship held in Hyderabad. In June 2007, he also represented India in the Asian Boxing Championship for Men in Mongolia and won a bronze medal.
Railways issued a policy in 2007 under which the sportspersons it recruited were eligible for the grant of additional salary increments for excellence in national and international championships.
However, the 2007 policy was superseded by a revised one in 2010, which stipulated that only five additional increments can be granted to a Railway servant in their entire service career on the sports count.
In June 2014, Kumar submitted a representation seeking two additional increments due from 2007.
However, his request was rejected by the Railways on the grounds that by that time, the 2007 policy had been superseded, and the ceiling on the number of additional increments had been imposed.
This rejection was challenged by the sportsperson before the CAT, which directed the Railways to give two additional increments to him. The Railways challenged the tribunal’s order in the high court.
The high court upheld the tribunal’s order noting that Kumar’s entitlement crystallised on the dates of his medal-winning performances in 2007.