JUDGMENT : M.K. Shah, J. This is a case in which a permanent employee working as a cartman in the Railway was denied the prescribed pay scale, on what may be called a "super technical ground", and the plaintiff has met with failure in his attempt to get justice at the doors of both the Courts below. 2. The plaintiff was appointed as a cartmen in the year 1937 in the Engineering department in the old Bhavnagar State Railway. That railway merged into the Saurashtra State Railway in the year 1948, which, in its turn underwent Federal Financial integration of April 1, 1950 and thereafter, on Nov. 4, 1951, it merged with the Western Railway. The plaintiff was originally paid Rs. 60/- per month on his appointment as a cartman, his duty being to tranship railway material from one place to another as directed by the supervisory staff in his own cart, which he had to maintain along with two bullocks for transhipment of railway goods. His salary was increased to Rs. 150/- per month, and it was shown at Rs. 5/- per day. He was enjoying all the privileges of leave, railway passes and other rights which other railway employees enjoyed. The cadre of pay scales in force in which the plaintiff was working was sanctioned into a prescribed scale of Rs. 30-35, and it is the plaintiffs case that it was for the railway administration to fix his pay in the scale and put him in the cadre as he was a permanent railway employee. This scale was subsequently increased into a scale of Rs. 70-85 with effect from July 1, 1959. Though the plaintiff had exercised the option of being absorbed in the new pay scale on the regular cadre, the railway administration failed to do so, and it was the plaintiffs case that he was entitled to pay scales from April 1, 1950, on the basis that he was brought on the regular cadre in the pay scales of Rs. 30-35 later raised to Rs. 70-85. (x x x) 3. x x x x x x 4. The learned trial Judge though he found that the plaintiff had proved that he was appointed as a cartman on a monthly salary of Rs. 30-35 later raised to Rs. 70-85. (x x x) 3. x x x x x x 4. The learned trial Judge though he found that the plaintiff had proved that he was appointed as a cartman on a monthly salary of Rs. 60/- and that he was a permanent employee in the Engineering Department of the Western Railway, yet held that he was not entitled to be absorbed in the scale of Rs. 30-35 which was subsequently converted into the new scale of Rs. 70-85 with effect from 1st July 1959. (x x x x) 5. The matter was taken up in appeal and the appeal was heard by the learned Assistant Judge, Bhavnagar, who, by his order, dated Nov. 16, 1973, dismissed the same, aggrieved by which order, the plaintiff has preferred this second appeal. 6. In the instant case, there cannot be any dispute that the plaintiff is a permanent railway employee and is not a casual or a daily wager. When there was merger of the Bhavnagar Railway with the Saurashtra Railway, he was getting a salary of Rs. 150/- per month. As Ex. 44 shows revision was made by the Central Pay Commission in regard to the scales of pay to be allowed to the non-gazetted employees of the Saurashtra Railway and had been carefully considered and the President of the Railway Board was pleased to decide that the scales of pay would be applicable to the various posts as shown in the schedule; and those scales of pay will have effect from 1-4-1950 unless otherwise stated in the schedule. Paragraph 2 of the said letter, dated June 29, 1951, from the Government of India, Ministry of Railways (Railway Board) addressed to the General Manager further states as under:- "In accordance with the orders contained in item (i) of para 1 of Boards letter No. Es 50 Tr 4/10 dated the 21st Oct. 1950, the staff should now be given an option either to elect the Central Pay Commission scales of pay or the existing ex-State Railway scales of pay. This option should be exercised by the staff within a period of 3 months from the date of issue of this letter and the option once exercised will be final." 7. 1950, the staff should now be given an option either to elect the Central Pay Commission scales of pay or the existing ex-State Railway scales of pay. This option should be exercised by the staff within a period of 3 months from the date of issue of this letter and the option once exercised will be final." 7. It appears that in pursuance of the directions contained in this letter of the Railway Board, the Western Railway issued its memorandum or letter, dated Jan. 16, 1963, from the DEN, Bhavnagar to AEN Bhavnagar Para, inter alia, stating that it had been suggested to follow the procedure as in vogue in the Sanitary department in respect of engagement of cart-drivers, according to which the cart-driver was to be in the scale of Rs. 70-85 with the condition that he is to own his own bullock/bullocks, and that if one bullock is brought, he will be entitled to allowance of Rs. 45/- per month, and if a pair of bullocks is brought, he would be entitled to an allowance of Rs. 90/- per month. The AEN was then asked to ascertain from the Engineering Department cart-drivers whether they were willing to work on the above lines, and then, we find, Ex. 45, which is a letter dated Jan. 24, 1963, addressed by the plaintiff to the defendant. This had a reference to the letter No. E 762/- 16-1-63 i.e. Ex. 48. In this letter E 762/ 19-1-63, the figure `9 is so written that it may appear to be `8 also. However, as the number tallies, the reference is to the said letter, Ex. 48 and to none else. In this letter, the plaintiff in terms, stated that he was willing to work on the salary as mentioned in the said letter. If was argued by Mr. D. U. Shah, the learned Advocate appearing for the plaintiff, that once the option is exercised by the plaintiff to opt for the new pay scale of the regular cadre, the offer is accepted, because Ex. 44, in terms says that the staff should be given an option either to elect the Central Pay Commission scales of pay or the existing ex-State Railway scales of pay within a period of three months of the issue of the letter, and the option, once exercised will be final. 44, in terms says that the staff should be given an option either to elect the Central Pay Commission scales of pay or the existing ex-State Railway scales of pay within a period of three months of the issue of the letter, and the option, once exercised will be final. Therefore, once the offer is made in pursuance of this direction to the plaintiff by the letter, which is at Ex. 48, and the plaintiff accepts that offer and opts for the pay scales in the regular cadre, the operation would be complete irrespective of the fact whether the formality or the ministerial work of showing his name in the register as an employee taken on the regular cadre is done or not. This would be a mere formality to be done by the railway. In the instant case, as observed by the learned Assistant Judge, the service record of the plaintiff, as would have been maintained by that railway, is not produced in the case. The learned Judge prefaces this remark with the words: "Unfortunately for the plaintiff, it is difficult to understand why the plaintiff should suffer if the defendant railway who is in custody of the relevant service record of the plaintiff fails to produce them." 8. Again, after referring to the plaintiffs letter, Ex. 45, in reply to Ex. 48, the learned Judge remarks that he is not taken up in the scale of Rs. 70-85 and is not given fodder allowance, and that there is no evidence to show that this letter of the plaintiff has reached the office. Now, this is not a correct statement in view of the fact that the letter, Ex. 45, is the original letter written by the plaintiff, and has been produced by the defendant railway itself along with the list Ex. 32/2. 9. Another reason given for dismissing the plaintiffs suit by both the Courts is that in Ex. 44 it is stated by the Board that the cartmen should be put on the prescribed scale if they are brought to the regular cadre, and that, as there is no evidence to show that the plaintiff was brought on the regular cadre, he is not entitled to the prescribed scale. In my opinion both the Courts have erred in taking this rather too narrow and too technical view. It is true, at page 13 of Ex. In my opinion both the Courts have erred in taking this rather too narrow and too technical view. It is true, at page 13 of Ex. 44, in the schedule showing the prescribed scales of pay for the nongazetted posts of the Saurashtra Railway, accompanying Railway Boards letter, dated June 26, 1951, under the heading- "Engineering Department", two posts of drivers with bullock carts are shown, with the existing scale of Rs. 5/- per day, without D.A., and again there is shown the prescribed scale of Rs. 30-35, with the remarks in the remarks column in the following words; If they are brought to the regular cadre". In my opinion, both the Courts have taken too narrow a -view of these words which do not necessarily refer, to the mechanical act of physically bringing the names of the members of the concerned staff on the register for the regular cadre. Once, in pursuance of the directions given as per Ex. 44, a communication is issued asking the employee to show whether he wants to opt for the regular cadre or not, and once the employee in response to this communication exercises the option, the process is complete. That means, he is entitled to the salary available to the staff members brought on the regular cadre. The actual act of showing his name in the register of the regular cadre is a formality or a mechanical act, and, if the railway administration fails to perform that formality, or, do that mechanical act, an employee who has already opted cannot be treated as not being brought to the regular cadre on the new pay scales, but continued on the existing pay scales. What is required by Ex. 44, in the operative part of the letter, dated June 26, 1951, para 2, is that the staff should be given an option, either to elect the Central Pay Commission scales of pay or the existing ex-State Railway scales of pay. A time limit is prescribed for exercising this option by the staff, and, it is then provided that the option once exercised would be final, once the I employee, therefore, exercises the option, it will become final, and the fact that the formality of showing his name on the regular cadre is not performed by the railway will not wipe out the effect of finality. The lower Courts, therefore, in my opinion, erred in taking the view that the plaintiff was not entitled to the pay scales in the regular cadre, because, his name was not shown in the regular cadre. The error which the lower Courts committed was to read the remarks contained in the remarks column of a schedule as containing a condition precedent ignoring the operative and effective part contained in the body of the Boards communication. Even if the contents of the remarks column were read along with the content in para two in the body portion of the communication, they would not have taken a restricted and literal view of the remarks. Bearing in view, the object of the communication, the remarks could have been and should have been interpreted to mean the acquisition of the right on the part of the employee to have his name shown in the register for regular cadre, and not the mechanical act of so doing. After all, considerations of justice and equity should prevail over technicalities when it concerns the fate of a poor permanent employee, who having exercised the option and accepted the offer as presented to him, should not suffer for no fault on his part. It would be violation of all canons of construction to construe remarks in a schedule in isolation without reference to the main and substantive part of the [documents. Conflicts, if any, should be resolved by harmonizing and reconciling the Schedule with the body part of the document. A schedule cannot override the operative and effective part of the content in the body of the document. In any event, in construing and interpreting such documents, the substance should prevail over the form and not vice versa, as has happened in the instant case, with the result that grave injustice has been done to a toiler in the Railway department of the Government. 10. It should be borne in mind that, as per the findings given by the trial Court, which are not disturbed by the lower appellate Court, the plaintiff was held to be a permanent employee in the Engineering Department of the Western Railway, he having been appointed as a cart man in 1937, in the original Bhavnagar State Railway, on a monthly salary of Rs. 60/-. At the relevant time he was drawing a salary of Rs. 60/-. At the relevant time he was drawing a salary of Rs. 150/-per month and, he continued on that salary with the Saurashtra Railway, which later merged with the Western Railway, on and from November 5, 1951. The Central Pay Commission prescribed certain scales for railway employees and option was given as per Ex. 44 to the plaintiff and other employees either to elect to the Central Pay Commission scales of pay or the existing ex-State Railway scales of pay, with a provision that once the option was exercised, it would become final. This was communicated to the plaintiff by Ex. 48, and the plaintiff exercised his option by his letter Ex. 45, which became then final. If the railway thereafter fails to perform the formality of showing his name as a member on the regular cadre in the pay scales for which he had opted, it cannot be said that he was still continuing on the existing scale of Ex-State Railway pay scales. The decisions, therefore, of both the Courts are patently wrong, and the plaintiff should, therefore, succeed in this appeal, (x x x x) 11. X X X X Appeal partly allowed.