Original Application No. 177/2007. Case: 1. Archana Jain W/o Late Sita Ram Jain, 2. Jaswant Sharma S/o Jagdish Chander Sharma, 3. Inderpal S/o Panna Lal, 4. Swroop Chand S/o Mangal Chand, 5. Rajendra Kumar S/o Jai Singh, 6. Jagdish Prasad S/o Chhaju Ram Vs 1. Union of India, Through General Manager, North Western Railway, Jaipur, 2. Divisional Railway Manager, North Western Railway, Jaipur, 3. Om Prakash Sharma S/o Radhey Shyam Sharma, 4. Mohan Kishan Bassi S/o Vas Deo Bassi, 5. Om Prakash S/o Ganga Ram, 6. Jagdish Prasad S/o Rama Kishan, 7. Mata Deen Meena S/o Kana Ram, 8. Kuldeep Singh Choudhary. Central Administrative Tribunal
| Case Number | Original Application No. 177/2007 |
| Judges | K. S. Rathore (Judicial Member) & Anil Kumar (Administrative Member) |
| Issue | Indian Railway Establishment Code |
| Judgement Date | May 24, 2011 |
| Court | Central Administrative Tribunal |
Judgment:
(Jaipur Bench)
-
Brief facts of the case are that the applicants are working as Electric Fitter in the Diesel Shed, Phulera of Jaipur Division, North Western Railway. The respondents issued letter dated 28.2.2007 and revised seniority of the staff as mentioned in the letter. Shri Jaswant Singh and others filed OA No.864/92 before CAT-Jaipur Bench challenging the panel dated 8/12.2.89 for the post of Electric Fitter and the same was decided on 22.9.2004 stating therein that 'for all these reasons we are of the view that the panel, Annexure A/1, should be quashed. The respondents have given the appointments subject to the decision of this Tribunal, naturally, they will not be operative on account of the judgment of this Tribunal' and in para-6 observed as under:-
6. Looking to the hardship, we direct that the appointments so made may be continued for a period of three months only from the date of the receipt of the copy of this order. The respondents will be at liberty to give the provisional appointments afresh on the basis of the merit list/marks secured till the fresh selections are made according to the rules and the persons who are eligible are allowed to appear. Thus, the provisional appointments so given shall not be continued beyond one year. However, the respondents will be at liberty to prepare the fresh panel according to the rules and in case the panel is prepared earlier, then panel can be enforced.
The respondents have mentioned that the seniority has been changed and notified as per direction of Hon'ble CAT, Jodhpur Bench in OA No.368/96 and 111/97 decided on 27.9.2000.
The General Manager, Western Railway framed a policy in the year 1998 and this policy was framed in consultation with both the Trade Unions and decided that staff of Diesel Shed, Abu Road, Phulera, Chitorgarh, Udaipur, Ajmer, Jaipur were given option to maintain their lien, seniority and promotion on the basis of their final option exercised upto 31.8.1998 and the policy was circulated vide DRM, Ajmer letter dated 25.8.98.
The applicants represented their case to the respondents against the seniority notified vide Ann.A/2 and also given notice for demand of justice through their advocate on 29.3.2007 and respondents have replied the representation vide letter dated 18.4.2007 advising that the seniority list dated 28.2.2007 (Ann.A/2) is final.
Aggrieved and dis-satisfied by the action of the respondents rejecting representation vide Ann.A/1, the applicants have filed the present OA on the ground that pursuant to direction issued by the CAT-Jodhpur Bench vide judgment dated 22.9.94, the seniority list was revised and since the respondents have not preferred any appeal against the judgment dated 22.9.94, as such, it has attained finality in the year 1994 itself.
The respondents have promoted the employees on the basis of the seniority notified for Jaipur Division and the staff working in Diesel Shed, Abu Road (Ajmer Division) was not included in this list. The benefit of judgment Ann.A/4 is...
To continue reading
Request your trial