Central Administrative Tribunal - Ahmedabad
Satyendra Kumar C vs M/O Railways on 29 June, 2022
:: 1 :: O.A./306/2020 .
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
AHMEDABAD BENCH
Original Application No.306/2020
With
M.A.No.289/2020
Dated this the 29th day of June, 2022
Reserved On: 06.04.2022
Pronounced On:29.06.2022
CORAM :
HON'BLE SHRI JAYESH V BHAIRAVIA, MEMBER (J)
HONBLE DR A K DUBEY, MEMBER (A)
1. Satyendra Kumar C.,
Age:46 years (DoB being 09.07.1974)
Son of late Shri Chaturbhuj Lal,
Presently serving as Chief Luggage Clerk in Parcel
Office, ADI,
Under the Ahmedabad Railway Division of Western
Railway Zone,
Address For Communication:
Block Bo.1/202, Surgam Elegance,
Near S.P. ring Road, silver Habitat, Odhav,
Vastral, Ahmedabad 382 418.
2. Shaikh Mohammed Zuber M.
Age:34 years (DoB being 22.01.1986)
Son of Shri Mohammed Yakoob,
Presently serving as Vigilance Inspector (T),
In O/o SDGM-CCG, Mumbai,
Address for Communication:
No.201, Aman Residency, Opp.Samira Residency,
Behind Ujalaa Avenue, Vishala Circle, Juhapura,
Ahmedabad 380 055.
3. Anuj Prasad G. Singh,
Age:49 years (DoB being 20.04.1971)
Son of Shri Gajendra Prasad Singh,
Presently serving as Chief Luggage Clerk in O/o CLS,
ADI, Ahmedabad Railway Division,
Western Railway Zone,
Address For Communication:
:: 2 :: O.A./306/2020 .
B/26-27, Gayatri Society,
Vivekanand Nagar, Hathijan,
Ahmedabad 382 485.
4. Prawin Kumar
Age: 44 years (DoB being 15.09.1976)
S/o Shri Geetea Prasad Singh
Presently serving as Chief Goods Clerk in O/o CTNL,
Gandhidham, Ahmedabad Railway Division of
Western Railway Zone,
Address For Communication:
No.589-C, Railway Colony,
Gandhidham 370 201. .......Applicants
(By Advocate : Mr.M.S.Rao)
Vs.
1. Union of India,
(to be served through the Special Secretary to the
Govt. of India & the Ex Officio Chairman, Railway
Board, Ministry of Railways,
Rail Bhavan, New Delhi - 110 001.
2. Western Railway,
(to be served through its General Manager (E), W.Rly,
Zone, Office of the General Manager (E),
W.Rly.Hqrs. Office, Church Gate, Mumbai 400 020
3. The Divisional Railway Manager (E),
Ahmedabad Railway Division,
Western Railway Zone, O/o DRM (E), ADI,
Near Chamunda Mata Bridge, Naroda road,
Ahmedabad 380 025.
4. Shri A.U.Solanki,
[Former Assistant Personnel Officer (Traffic) under
DRM(E)] O/o DRM(E), ADI,
Near Chamunda Mata Bridge, Naroda road,
Ahmedabad 380 025.
5. Shri D.M.Joshi,
Chief Luggage Clerk, Ahmedabad Railway Division,
C/o DRM(E), ADI,
:: 3 :: O.A./306/2020 .
Near Chamunda Mata Bridge, Naroda Road,
Ahmedabad 380 025.
6. Shri Ravindrasingh Thakor,
Chief Luggage Clerk, Kalol, Ahmedabad Railway
Division,
C/o DRM(E), ADI,
Near Chamunda Mata Bridge, Naroda Road,
Ahmedabad 380 025.
7. Shri Parag Contractor,
Chief booking Clerk,
Ahmedabad Railway Division,
C/o DRM(E), ADI,
Near Chamunda Mata Bridge, Naroda Road,
Ahmedabad 380 025.
8. Shri D.I. Shah, Chief Booking Clerk,
O/o Sr.(DCM)(O),
Ahmedabad Railway Division,
C/o DRM(E), ADI,
Near Chamunda Mata Bridge, Naroda Road,
Ahmedabad 380 025.
9. Shri Vijay N. Bhatt,
Chief Booking Clerk, Ahmedabad Railway Division,
C/o DRM(E), ADI,
Near Chamunda Mata Bridge, Naroda Road,
Ahmedabad 380 025.
10. Smt. Renu Kapoor,
Chief Luggage Clerk, Ahmedabad Railway Division,
C/o DRM(E), ADI,
Near Chamunda Mata Bridge, Naroda Road,
Ahmedabad 380 025.
11. Shri Sunilkumar P. Sharma,
Chief Booking Clerk, Mehsana, Ahmedabad Railway
Division,
C/o DRM(E), ADI,
Near Chamunda Mata Bridge, Naroda Road,
Ahmedabad 380 025.
:: 4 :: O.A./306/2020 .
12. Shri R.A. Sharma,
Chief Booking Clerk, SDGM, Ahmedabad Railway
Division,
C/o DRM(E), ADI,
Near Chamunda Mata Bridge, Naroda Road,
Ahmedabad 380 025.
13. Shri R.U. Ravat,
Chief Luggage Clerk, Ahmedabad Railway Division,
C/o DRM(E), ADI,
Near Chamunda Mata Bridge, Naroda Road,
Ahmedabad 380 025.
14. Shri B.P. Patel,
Chief Booking Clerk, Patan, Ahmedabad Railway
Division,
C/o DRM(E), ADI,
Near Chamunda Mata Bridge, Naroda Road,
Ahmedabad 380 025.
15. Shri K.S. Verma,
Chief Booking Clerk, Himmatnagar, Ahmedabad
Railway Division,
C/o DRM(E), ADI,
Near Chamunda Mata Bridge, Naroda Road,
Ahmedabad 380 025.
16. Shri P.N. Solanki,
Chief Booking Clerk, ADI, Ahmedabad Railway
Division,
C/o DRM(E), ADI,
Near Chamunda Mata Bridge, Naroda Road,
Ahmedabad 380 025.
17. Shri Jayantibhai R. Jadav,
Chief Booking Clerk, UMN, Ahmedabad Railway
Division,
C/o DRM(E), ADI,
Near Chamunda Mata Bridge, Naroda Road,
Ahmedabad 380 025.
18. Shri Hiraprakash S.,
:: 5 :: O.A./306/2020 .
Chief Booking Clerk, Palanpur, Ahmedabad Railway
Division,
C/o DRM(E), ADI,
Near Chamunda Mata Bridge, Naroda Road,
Ahmedabad 380 025.
19. Shri Ajay Ambalal Modi,
Chief Goods Clerk, LINCH,
Ahmedabad Railway Division,
C/o DRM(E), ADI,
Near Chamunda Mata Bridge, Naroda Road,
Ahmedabad 380 025.
20. Shri Pradeep Shrivastava,
Chief Goods Clerk, MDPT,
Ahmedabad Railway Division,
C/o DRM(E), ADI,
Near Chamunda Mata Bridge, Naroda Road,
Ahmedabad 380 025.
21. Shri Sudhir K. Yadav,
Chief Booking Clerk, BVJ, Ahmedabad Railway
Division,
C/o DRM(E), ADI,
Near Chamunda Mata Bridge, Naroda Road,
Ahmedabad 380 025.
22. Shri G.K. Mishra,
(Ex. Chief Goods Clerk, KRIR, Ahmedabad Railway
Division),
C/o DRM(E), ADI,
Near Chamunda Mata Bridge, Naroda Road,
Ahmedabad 380 025.
23. Shri M.I. Patel,
Chief Goods Clerk, Mehsana,
Ahmedabad Railway Division,
C/o DRM(E), ADI,
Near Chamunda Mata Bridge, Naroda Road,
Ahmedabad 380 025.
24. Shri R.G. Shrimali,
Chief Luggage Clerk, ADI,
:: 6 :: O.A./306/2020 .
Ahmedabad Railway Division,
C/o DRM(E), ADI,
Near Chamunda Mata Bridge, Naroda Road,
Ahmedabad 380 025.
25. Shri Madanlal Kaluram,
(Retd. Chief Goods Clerk, SDGM,
Ahmedabad Railway Division,
C/o DRM(E), ADI,
Near Chamunda Mata Bridge, Naroda Road,
Ahmedabad 380 025.
26. Shri Indrakumar Dharma
(Retd. Chief Goods Clerk, GIM,
Ahmedabad Railway Division)
C/o DRM (E), ADI,
Near Chamunda Mata Bridge, Naroda Road,
Ahmedabad - 380 025.
27. Shri Natubhai D. Chauhan
Chief Goods Clerk, IFFCO-KHD,
Ahmedabad Railway Division, C/o DRM (E), ADI,
Near Chamunda Mata Bridge, Naroda Road,
Ahmedabad - 380 025.
28. Shri Bharat S. Maratha,
Chief Luggage Clerk, ADI
Ahmedabad Railway Division, C/o DRM (E), ADI,
Near Chamunda Mata Bridge, Naroda Road,
Ahmedabad - 380 025.
29. Shri Ramcharan Meena
Chief Luggage Clerk, ADI
Ahmedabad Railway Division, C/o DRM (E), ADI,
Near Chamunda Mata Bridge, Naroda Road,
Ahmedabad - 380 025.
30. Shri Ramsingh Meena
Chief Luggage Clerk, ADI
Ahmedabad Railway Division, C/o DRM (E), ADI,
Near Chamunda Mata Bridge, Naroda Road,
Ahmedabad - 380 025.
:: 7 :: O.A./306/2020 .
31. Shri Mukesh chand Meena
Chief Goods Clerk, ADI,
Ahmedabad Railway Division, C/o DRM (E), ADI,
Near Chamunda Mata Bridge, Naroda Road,
Ahmedabad - 380 025.
32. Shri Sunil Kumar Singh
Chief Booking Clerk in O/o. Sr. DCM (O),
Ahmedabad Railway Division, C/o DRM (E), ADI,
Near Chamunda Mata Bridge, Naroda Road,
Ahmedabad - 380 025.
33. Shri Nishikant Tiwari
Chief Booking Clerk, CTNL-ADI,
Ahmedabad Railway Division, C/o DRM (E), ADI,
Near Chamunda Mata Bridge, Naroda Road,
Ahmedabad - 380 025.
34. Shri Santosh Kumar Rajendra Prasad
Chief Booking Clerk, RKH,
Ahmedabad Railway Division, C/o DRM (E), ADI,
Near Chamunda Mata Bridge, Naroda Road,
Ahmedabad - 380 025.
35. Shri K. R. Mishra
(Retd. Chief Booking Clerk, ADI,
Ahmedabad Railway Division) C/o DRM (E), ADI,
Near Chamunda Mata Bridge, Naroda Road,
Ahmedabad - 380 025.
36. Smt. Silvi Jose
(Retd. Chief Goods Clerk in O/o. Sr. DCM (O),
Ahmedabad Railway Division)
C/o DRM (E), ADI,
Near Chamunda Mata Bridge, Naroda Road,
Ahmedabad - 380 025.
37. Shri M. A. Shaikh
(Retd. Chief Booking Clerk, ADI,
Ahmedabad Railway Division) C/o DRM (E), ADI,
Near Chamunda Mata Bridge, Naroda Road,
Ahmedabad - 380 025.
:: 8 :: O.A./306/2020 .
38. Smt. Vasumati Brahmbhatt
Chief Goods Clerk, KKF,
Ahmedabad Railway Division, C/o DRM (E), ADI,
Near Chamunda Mata Bridge, Naroda Road,
Ahmedabad - 380 025.
39. Shri T. V. Mehta,
Chief Goods Clerk in O/o. Sr. DCM (O),
Ahmedabad Railway Division, C/o DRM (E), ADI,
Near Chamunda Mata Bridge, Naroda Road,
Ahmedabad - 380 025.
40. Shri Nandlal Achala
(Retd. Chief Goods Clerk, MDPT,
Ahmedabad Railway Division)
C/o DRM (E), ADI,
Near Chamunda Mata Bridge, Naroda Road,
Ahmedabad - 380 025.
41. Shri Harilal Yadav
Chief Booking Clerk, HMT,
Ahmedabad Railway Division, C/o DRM (E), ADI,
Near Chamunda Mata Bridge, Naroda Road,
Ahmedabad - 380 025.
42. Shri R. V. Makwana
Chief Luggage Clerk, Counter-ADI,
Ahmedabad Railway Division, C/o DRM (E), ADI,
Near Chamunda Mata Bridge, Naroda Road,
Ahmedabad - 380 025.
43. Shri Ramji A. Parmar
(Retd. Chief Luggage Clerk, ADI,
Ahmedabad Railway Division)
C/o DRM (E), ADI,
Near Chamunda Mata Bridge, Naroda Road,
Ahmedabad - 380 025.
44. Shri N.G. Waghela
(Retd. Chief Booking Clerk, ADI,
Ahmedabad Railway Division) C/o DRM (E), ADI,
Near Chamunda Mata Bridge, Naroda Road,
Ahmedabad - 380 025.
:: 9 :: O.A./306/2020 .
45. Shri Lutawan R.,
(Retd. Chief Goods Clerk, Sad-SBT,
Ahmedabad Railway Division)
C/o DRM (E), ADI,
Near Chamunda Mata Bridge, Naroda Road,
Ahmedabad - 380 025.
46. Shri V. V. Vaghela
Chief Booking Clerk, ADI,
Ahmedabad Railway Division, C/o DRM (E), ADI,
Near Chamunda Mata Bridge, Naroda Road,
Ahmedabad - 380 025.
47. Smt. Neerja Dutta
Chief Booking Clerk in O/o Sr. DCM (O)
Ahmedabad Railway Division, C/o DRM (E), ADI,
Near Chamunda Mata Bridge, Naroda Road,
Ahmedabad - 380 025.
48. Shri Pradeep Ronak
Chief Booking Clerk, SID,
Ahmedabad Railway Division, C/o DRM (E), ADI,
Near Chamunda Mata Bridge, Naroda Road,
Ahmedabad - 380 025.
49. Shri Lalit Nimesh
Chief Luggage Clerk, Kalol,
Ahmedabad Railway Division, C/o DRM (E), ADI,
Near Chamunda Mata Bridge, Naroda Road,
Ahmedabad - 380 025.
50. Shri Jayant Kumar D.,
Chief Booking Clerk, ADI,
Ahmedabad Railway Division, C/o DRM (E), ADI,
Near Chamunda Mata Bridge, Naroda Road,
Ahmedabad - 380 025.
51. Shri Parsottam Vaghela
Chief Booking Clerk, ADI,
Ahmedabad Railway Division, C/o DRM (E), ADI,
Near Chamunda Mata Bridge, Naroda Road,
Ahmedabad - 380 025.
:: 10 :: O.A./306/2020 .
52. Shri Rohtash Mahiwal
Chief Booking Clerk, ADI,
Ahmedabad Railway Division, C/o DRM (E), ADI,
Near Chamunda Mata Bridge, Naroda Road,
Ahmedabad - 380 025.
53. Shri Hareshkumar K.,
Chief Booking Clerk, DISA,
Ahmedabad Railway Division, C/o DRM (E), ADI,
Near Chamunda Mata Bridge, Naroda Road,
Ahmedabad - 380 025.
54. Shri Ramesh Chand Meena
Chief Booking Clerk, ADI,
Ahmedabad Railway Division, C/o DRM (E), ADI,
Near Chamunda Mata Bridge, Naroda Road,
Ahmedabad - 380 025.
55. Shri Vinod Kumar H.,
Chief Booking Clerk, MAN,
Ahmedabad Railway Division, C/o DRM (E), ADI,
Near Chamunda Mata Bridge, Naroda Road,
Ahmedabad - 380 025.
56. Shri Om Prakash S. Khichi
(Ex. Chief Booking Clerk, PTN,
Ahmedabad Railway Division) C/o DRM (E), ADI,
Near Chamunda Mata Bridge, Naroda Road,
Ahmedabad - 380 025.
57. Shri Ajit O. Khanna,
Chief Booking Clerk, KLL,
Ahmedabad Railway Division, C/o DRM (E), ADI,
Near Chamunda Mata Bridge, Naroda Road,
Ahmedabad - 380 025.
58. Shri Rajesh K. Chauhan
Chief Booking Clerk, ADI,
Ahmedabad Railway Division, C/o DRM (E), ADI,
Near Chamunda Mata Bridge, Naroda Road,
Ahmedabad - 380 025.
:: 11 :: O.A./306/2020 .
59. Shri Baldevbhai D. Solanki
Chief Booking Clerk, SDGM,
Ahmedabad Railway Division, C/o DRM (E), ADI,
Near Chamunda Mata Bridge, Naroda Road,
Ahmedabad - 380 025.
...Respondents
(By Advocate Mr. M J Patel R - 1 to 3
& A.L.Sharma - 6,12,14 & 57)
ORDER
Per:Dr.A.K.Dubey, Member (A)
1. Aggrieved by the notification dated 06.08.2020 (Annexure-A/1) seeking to revise the settled seniority and to place him below the private respondents by the show cause notice dated 06.08.2020 (Annexure-A/2), the applicant has filed this OA seeking following reliefs:-
A. Call upon the respondents herein to place before this Hon'ble Tribunal for its perusal the entire original file / noting file / documents ranging giving rise to the passing of the impugned document at Annexure-A/1 hereto by the Office of the respondent 3 herein;
B. Upon the close scrutiny and perusal of the aforesaid file /noting file/ documents, your Lordships may be graciously further pleased to quash and set aside (i) the impugned Notification bearing No.EC/1030/4/15-Part-I, dated 06.08.2020 at annexure-A/1 hereto in so far as it seeks to revise the settled seniority position of the applicants herein and place them BELOW the private respondents contrary to the judicial rulings and the circulars of the Railway Board and (ii) the impugned show Cause Notices - all bearing No.EC/1030/4/15-Part- I and all dated 06.08.2020 at Annexure-a/2 to Annexure- A/9 hereto, holding and declaring the same to be actuated by the extraneous considerations on the part of railway authorities in Ahmedabad Railway Division to oblige the private respondents herein obviously in return for some financial favours received from the,:
C. hold and declare that the respective seniority position granted to the applicants herein in the past in Ahmedabad Railway Division were perfectly legal, valid, :: 12 :: O.A./306/2020 .
proper and in accordance with the Railway Board's instructions / guidelines on the subject and that all the applicants herein are accordingly entitled as of right to be continued to enjoy the said settled seniority position without any interruption whatsoever from any authority in the railway administration.
D. permanently restrain the official respondents herein from proceeding any further in pursuance of the impugned Seniority List dated 06.08.2020 at annexure- a/1 hereto;
E. direct the official respondents herein to consider the cases of the applicants herein ,as and when they are due for grant of promotion to the next higher cadre of CBS/CLS/CGS, as the case may be, based on the seniority assigned to them respectively in the past prior to the issuance of the impugned Seniority List dated 06.08.2020 at Annexure-A/1 hereto.
F. Grant such other and further relief/s as may be deemed fit and proper in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case."
2. In response to the notification dated 17.06.2010 (Annexure-
A/3) for selection process for promotion to the vacant posts of Commercial Apprentice under 10% LDCE quota, the applicant has applied. Vide order dated 08.11.2010 No.EC/1025/4/ADI Comml. Appt. LDCE (10%) (Annexure A/4) the department had issued a notification consisting the names of employees who were found eligible/Not eligible to appear in the selection of written test held on 11.12.2010 (Annexure-A/4). The railway administration, vide its Memorandum dated 16.02.2011 No.E/CONF/1025/03/COMM/10 declared the list of 29 candidates who were qualified in the written test held on 11.12.2010. Applicants names were included in the above list. (Annexure-A/5). In April, 2011 the local railway administration in ADI, having taken in account the service record of all the aforesaid 29 candidates, came out with a Memorandum bearing No.E/CONF/1025/03/COMM/10. Dated 08.04.2011 (Annexure-A/6) whereby a Provisional Select Panel of 25 candidates (including all the applicants herein) for promotion to :: 13 :: O.A./306/2020 .
the post of Commercial apprentice under 10% LDCE quota, drawn in order of merit was declared. Pursuant to it, the applicants herein underwent the requisite in service training ZRTI, Udaipur and also the requisite field training. Upon completion of the aforesaid training by the applicants herein, the railway administration, vide Office Order No.72/13 dated 12.03.2013 (annexure-A/7) came out with a promotion and posting Order for the applicants herein as Chief Commercial Clerk in the pay scale of PB-9300-34800/- with GP of Rs.4200/-.
2.1 Learned counsel for the applicants relied on the order of the Principal Bench in OA No.1232/88 upheld by Hon'ble Supreme Court on 02.03.1994 which mandates to determine the date of seniority of the officials selected promoted under the 10% LDCE quota w.e.f. date of empanelment. The same has been followed by Principal Bench in its order in OA 106/1997 pursued on 01.06.2000 in Arjan Singh & Others vs. UOI & Others. Principal Bench order dated 02.02.2007 in OA No.2087/2005 in A.K.Mehrotra & Ors vs. UOI & Ors (Annexure-A/8) was affirmed by Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in WP(C) 2343/2012 dated 16.07.2014. With these as guiding principles the issue of assignment of seniority can be dealt with.
2.2 Respondents brought out combined seniority list of booking staff, luggage staff and goods staff vide notification dated 01.11.2013 (Annexure-A/11) where the applicants were duly assigned seniority higher than the private respondents even as some private respondents were promoted under 15% seniority quota earlier. From this combined seniority list dated 01.11.2013 and also the reserved category to which they belong, some of the persons came to be granted promotion to the next higher post of Chief booking Supervisor and Chief Goods Supervisor, (Annexure-A/12 to Annexure-A/15). In September 2015, the :: 14 :: O.A./306/2020 .
railway administration vide its notification No.EC/1030/4/15- Part-I dated 08.09.2015 (annexure-A/16) yet again came out with an updated seniority list for the cadres of Booking/Luggage/Goods staff wherein the applicants herein were shown senior to all the private respondents No.5 to 59 herein.
2.3 In 2017, some private respondents approached local railway administration in Ahmedabad for the seniority assigned to the applicants herein way back in 2013 and entertaining the private respondent No.4 herein , who was them serving as Assistant Personal Officer (Traffic)-a Group B Post under DRM(E) (Annexure-A/17). The applicants aver that the APO's action is bad in law. On perusal of the applicants' joint representations, the competent authority had decided not to disturb the settled seniority position of all of those who were promoted as Commercial Apprentices under 10% LDCE quota in view of the settled legal position in this behalf (Annexure-A/19).
3. M.A. 289/2020 for joint application allowed.
4. The facts of the case in nutshell are as under:-
4.1 After following the due selection procedure under 10% LDCE Quota for promotion to the Commercial Apprentices vide memo dated 08.04.3011 (Annexure-A/6) was brought out.
This was in order of merit. Accordingly, the applicants who figured in the panel underwent ZRTI training and field training. Pursuant thereto the promotion and passing order dated 12.03.2013 was issued. Later on, the respondents brought out the combined seniority list of Booking staff/luggage staff and goods staff vide notification dated 01.11.2013 (Annexure-A/11) where the applicants' seniority was duly assigned, which at that time was higher than the private respondents herein. Among the private respondents, some were promoted under 15% direct recruitment quota earlier. This combined seniority list was :: 15 :: O.A./306/2020 .
circulated and there was no objection. In fact this list was operated further as some employees got promotion in the year 2015 and 2016 (Annexure A/12 to Annexure -A/15) and on these two, no grievance was aired at that time. Vide notification dated 08.09.2015 No.EC/1030/4/15-Part-I yet updated seniority list was brought out and it exhorted the employees to make representation, if they wished, and still no objection came up. In this list also the applicants remain senior and until then the applicants did not have any cause of action. The records brought before us show that in 2017, some private respondents approached the authorities for their seniority where after the private respondent No.4, the then APO directed issuance of show cause notice and also directed to take action to draw up the fresh seniority list as revealed from the noting (Annexure- A/17). The counsel for the applicants argued that seeking to revisit the seniority after 3 rounds of seniority list having been published and remain unchallenged was strange to say the least and moreover the official who ordered this had no authority to do so and hence this action was beyond the APO's competence.
4.2 Pursuant to this, the show cause notices were issued to all applicants on 06.06.2017 (Annexure-A/18). Interestingly, the communication addressed to Shri Mukesh Chand Meena dated 18.01.2018 (Annexure-A/19) stated that representation of Shri Meena for correction of his name in seniority list was regretted being time barred. While the show cause notice proceedings were still on, vide notification dated 19.0.2019 another seniority list was published showing correctly the updated combined seniority list in the cadre of Commercial Apprentice. However, later in September, 2020 a new revised seniority list of Commercial Department pursuant to show cause notice was expected, which was likely to disturb the settled position and would have affected the applicants. Further, the show cause notice to 8 employees who had got promotion to Chief :: 16 :: O.A./306/2020 .
Booking/Luggage/Goods Supervisor were also likely to be affected. So the applicants approached this Tribunal. It is clear from the above that the seniority list after the selection process under 10% LDCE Quota in 2011 was published in 2013. New combined seniority list came up in 2015 and the department itself which has been acquiescing in bringing out the seniority list dated 19.02.2019, is now taking shelter under Rule, 302 after all these years, when the seniority list was not challenged. This has to be examined with reference to the rules in this regard. Rule 302 of IREM Vol.I reads as under:-
"Seniority in initial recruitment grades unless specifically stated otherwise, the seniority among the incumbents of a post in a grade is governed by the date of appointment to the grade. The grant of pay higher than the initial pay should not as a rule, confer on railway servant seniority above those who were already appointed against regular post. In categories of posts partially filled by direct recruitment and partially by promotion, the criterion for determination of seniority should be the date of regular promotion after due process in the case of promote and the date of joining the working post after due process in the case promotes and direct recruits among themselves. When the dates of entry in to a grade of promoted railway servants and direct recruits are the same they should be put in alternate positions, the promotees being senior to the direct recruits. Maintaining inter-se-seniority of each group.
Note-(i) In case the training period of direct recruit is curtailed in the exigencies of service, the date of joining the working post in such a direct recruit shall be the date he would have normally come to a working post after completion of the prescribed period of training.
Note-(ii) The provision contained in the Note (i) above will also apply to the Inter Apprentices and departmentally selected candidates against the quotas prescribed in certain categories to be filled by Limited Competitive Examination (Such as 10% in the case of Traffic and Commercial Apprentices)."
4.3 In this regard, the provisions contained in IREM 321 is significant which allows the staff concerned to represent about the assignment of the seniority. Para 321 of IREM Vol I very :: 17 :: O.A./306/2020 .
clearly stipulates that the issue of correction of seniority position should be represented within one year from the date of publication of seniority. Furthermore, the representation of Shri Meena was also regretted being time barred which means the respondents were sticking to the time line so prescribed. In this context, we may profit from the order of this Tribunal in OA No.302/2019, the relevant portion of which is quoted below:-
"15. The submission of the applicants is that the provision contained in Para 321 of IREM is only a Railway Board‟s instructions and same cannot be considered as statutory Rule. Therefore, it cannot be made applicable while deciding their representation for revision of the seniority list. The said submission in our considered view is not tenable in light of law laid down by Hon‟ble Apex Court in the case of Prabhat Ranjan Singh & another Vs R K Kushawa& another reported in 2019 (1) SCC (L&S) 786, wherein it has been held that the provision contained in IREM has statutory force. Therefore, we hold that the official respondents have correctly considered the representation dated 31.05.2019 by applying the provisions contained in Para 321 of IREM VolI.
16. The question of entertaining application/petition disputing the long standing seniority filed at a belated stage is no more res intergra. The constitution bench of Hon‟ble Apex Court in the case of Ram Chandra Shankar Deodhar Vs State of Maharastra (1974) SCC (L & S) 137had occasion to consider the effect of delay in challenging the promotion and seniority list and held that "any claim for seniority at a belated stage should be rejected in as much as it seeks to disturb the vested rights of other persons regarding seniority, rank and promotion which have accrued to them during the intervening period."
17. The Hon‟ble Apex Court in the case of Shiba Shankar Mohopatra& others Vs State of Orrisa & others reported in (2010) 12 SCC 471 after referringjudgment of the Constitution Bench in R.N. Bose v. Union of India &Ors., 1970 AIR(SC) 470 as also referring other judgments passed by Hon'ble Apex court in the case of,R.S. Makashi v. I.M. Menon &Ors., (1982) 1 SCC 379, K.R. Mudgal &Ors. v. R.P. Singh & Ors., (1986) 4 SCC 531, Malcom Lawrance Cecil D Souza v. Union of India &Ors., 1975 AIR(SC) 1269, B.S. Bajwa v. State of Punjab & Ors., 1999 AIR(SC) 1510,the Hon'ble Apex Court in Para 29 & 30 held as under: -
:: 18 :: O.A./306/2020 .
"29. It is settled law that fence-sitters cannot be allowed to raise the dispute or challenge the validity of the order after its conclusion. No party can claim the relief as a matter of right as one of the grounds for refusing relief is that the person approaching the Court is guilty of delay and the laches. The Court exercising public law jurisdiction does not encourage agitation of stale claims where the right of third parties crystallises in the interregnum. (vide Aflatoon&Ors. vs. Lt. Governor, Delhi &Ors., 1974 AIR(SC) 2077;
State of Mysore vs. V.K. Kangan&Ors., 1975 AIR(SC) 2190; Municipal Council, Ahmednagar &Anr. vs Shah HyderBeig& Ors., 2000 AIR(SC) 671; Inder Jit Gupta vs. Union of India &Ors., 2001 6 SCC 637; Shiv Dass vs. Union of India &Ors., 2007 AIR(SC) 1330; Regional Manager, A.P.SRTC vs. N. Satyanarayana &Ors., 2008 1 SCC 210; and City and Industrial Development Corporation vs. DosuAardeshirBhiwandiwala& Ors., 2009 1 SCC 168)."
30. Thus, in view of the above, the settled legal proposition that emerges is that once the seniority had been fixed and it remains in existence for a reasonable period, any challenge to the same should not be entertained. In K.R. Mudgal (supra), this Court has laid down, in crystal clear words that a seniority list which remains in existence for 3 to 4 years unchallenged, should not be disturbed. Thus, 3-4 years is a reasonable period for challenging the seniority and in case someone agitates the issue of seniority beyond this period, he has to explain the delay and laches in approaching the adjudicatory forum, by furnishing satisfactory explanation." At this stage, it is apt to mention that the Hon‟ble Apex Court in the said judgment of Shiba Shankar Mohopatra (supra) in para 33 further held that "........At the cost of repetition, it is stated that if the seniority list is to be challenged within 3 - 4 years of its issuance, we fail to understand as to why even OA No.203/2001 could not be dismissed on the ground of delay and laches, without entering into the merits of the case."
18. It can be seen from the aforesaid legal dictum laid down by Hon‟ble Apex Court that it is settled principle of law that the settled seniority cannot be unsettled after 3 to 4 years from its date of publication. In the present case, undisputedly, the applicants and the official respondents :: 19 :: O.A./306/2020 .
were well aware of the fact that after the LDCE, the applicants herein were found suitable by the competent authority and placed their names in provisional panel dated 28.08.2009.Since the training was linked with the promotional post of Sr. PWS, the applicants alongwith other LDCE candidates were sent for departmental/institutional training at ZRTI/UDZ. Only on successful completion of the said requisite training, they were appointed as Sr. PWS vide order dated 19.07.2010 along with other LDCE candidates. As such, the applicants herein joined their duty on their promotional post in the year 2010 itself.
19. Further, it is also not in dispute that after the applicants‟ appointment and posting vide order dated 19.07.2010 as Sr. PWS their seniority was determined by the Division of ADI (WR) and the first seniority list dated 06.05.2012 was notified/circulated. Followed by it, another seniority list dated 11.11.2013 was also notified and circulated. Admittedly, the names of applicants was included therein and seniority was assigned to them in the said list. Thereafter, all the regular posts of Sr. PWS were merged with the cadre of Junior Engineer (JE) w.e.f 03.09.2013. Accordingly, the official respondents vide notification dated 01.04.2014 notified and circulated the seniority list of JEs Engineering Department, ADI Division, wherein also the name of applicants along with other erstwhile Sr. PWS were included and respective seniority was assigned to them. Based on the said seniority lists, the competent authority had also issued the seniority list for subsequent years. At this stage, it is important to mention that it also emerges from the record that undisputedly, neither the Department disputed the settled seniority of Sr. PWS/JE (PW) fixed on 01.04.2014 nor the applicants herein challenged the assignment of their seniority. Not only that, the record further reveals that on acting upon the settled seniority dated 01.04.2014 of Sr. PWS/JE (PW), the competent authority, in the year 2015 granted further promotion to some of Railway servants in the cadre of SSE (PW). This reinforces that seniority was indeed settled. Therefore, once the seniority list was settled long back and operated, it cannot be unsettled at this belated stage. Thus, the claim for revision in settled seniority list of year 2014 and claim for assignment of fresh seniority in terms of Para 302 of IREM that too after gross delay of more than 6 years, in our considered view cannot be considered at this belated stage and the official respondents have correctly rejected the said belated claim/representation of the applicants.
:: 20 :: O.A./306/2020 .
20. In view of aforesaid discussion and in light of judgment passed by Hon‟ble Apex Court in the case of Shiba Shankar Mohopatra (supra) & Prabhat Ranjan Singh (supra), we do not find any legal infirmity in the impugned decision dated 05.09.2019 whereby the official respondents, rejected the belated representation of the applicants against the settled seniority list dated 01.04.2014,as also seniority list dated 13.05.2019, in terms of Para 321 of IREM Vol-I. 4.4 The official respondents have not been able to explain why only at a belated stage this revision has been undertaken when statutory provisions do not facilitate it. About the competency of APO initiating exercise, the respondents have contended that this was duly approved by the competent authority. We are not getting into this issue of competency of the authority ordering this because, the order itself does not strictly conform to the rule position.
4.5 After perusing the records brought before us, and hearing the counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion that the respondents themselves have been sticking to the seniority list of 2013 as updated in 2014 and 2019 and even after initiation of show cause notice in 2017, they have struck to the old practice and brought out the seniority list dated 19.02.2019. Therefore, we are constrained to observe that due to not agitating the issue in time and that too more than once, the seniority list of 2013, 2015 and 2019 have attained invincibility in view of the fact that no challenge or representation against them was preferred at the relevant time. Further, there is statutory stipulation of time limit within which challenge or objection to seniority has to be preferred. We follow the order passed by Principal Bench of this Tribunal in OA No. 1232/88 upheld by Hon'ble Apex Court on 02.03.1994 on this very issue. Further, PB order dated 01.06.2000 in OA 106/1997 in Arjan Singh & Ors vs. UOI & Ors. and PB order dated 02.02.2007 in OA 2087/2005 in A.K. Mehrotra & Ors. vs. UOI & Ors, which was affirmed by Hon'ble :: 21 :: O.A./306/2020 .
Delhi High Court in WP(C) 2343/2012 dated 16.07.2014, covers the issue in entirety.
5. In the above factual matrix and the guiding principles from the judgments quoted above, we find that awaking from a deep slumber after a few years is fraught with the danger of unsettling the settled seniority on infirm basis which, apart from not being in accordance with the IREM provisions, cannot be taken as a good administrative practice. In the light of the Apex Court's dictum that settled seniority cannot be disturbed at belated stage, we have no hesitation in quashing the notification dated 06.08.2020 (Annexure-A/1) in so far as it seeks to revise the settled seniority position. Related to this, we also quashed the show cause notices impugned here (Annexure-A/2) being violative of the provisions contained under Rule 321 of IREM Vol I. Consequent upon quashing of the impugned seniority list dated 06.08.2020, the seniority list dated 19.02.2019 shall operate. No Cost.
(A.K.Dubey) (Jayesh V. Bhairavia) Administrative Member Judicial Member SKV