Central Administrative Tribunal - Cuttack
L Nanda vs M/O Railways on 14 December, 2023
} 8.A.Nas, 260/528, 568 & 870 af 2017 CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBU NAL CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK
0.A.Nos, 260/528, 568 & 570 of 2017 Reserved on 30.11.2023 Pronounced on LEE S28 Bay B22 CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. PRAMOD KUMAR DAS, MEMBER (A) HON'BLE MR. RAINISH KUMAR RAL MEMBER {}} O.A.No, 260/00528 of 2017 Madan Mohan Pattanayak, aged about 54 years, S/o- Satya Narayan Pattanayak, At/Po- Kudiary, Jatni, Dist- Khurda, 732050 At Presently working Dy.CSO/Traffic, E.Co.Rallway, Bhubaneswar.
» Applicant
-Versus-
Union of India, represented through
1. General Manager, East Coast Railway, Chandrasekharpur, Bhubaneswar, Dist- Khurda.
2 Chief Personal Officer, East Coast Railway, Chandrasekharpur, Bh ubaneswar, Dist- Khurda.
3 PK Samal, Dy Chief Commercial Manager (Claims), East Coast Railway, Chandrasekharpur, Bhubaneswar, Dist-
Khurda, Pin-751023, ene Respondents Q.A.No. 260/00568 of 2017 Se ee eo O.ANos. 260/528, $65 & 970 of 2017 Aditya Kumar Taldi, aged about 52 years, $/o- Atul Kumar Taldi, At- EB-245, Baragada, BRIT Colony, Bhubaneswar- 751018. At Presently working as Addl. Registrar, Railway Claims Tribunal, Bhubaneswar.
wwe Applicant
-Versus-
Union of India, represented through 1, General Manager, East Coast Railway, Chandrasekharpur, Bhubaneswar, Dist- Khurda.
2.Chief Personal Officer, East Coast Railway, Chandrasekharpur, Bhubaneswar, Dist- Khurda.
3 PK Samal, Dy Chief Commercial Manager (Claims), East Coast Railway, Chandrasekharpur, Bhubaneswar, Dist- Khurda, Pin-751023.
enone Respondents
0.A. No. 260 /00570/2017 Lingaraj Nanda, aged about 55 years, S/o-Late Narasingha Nanda, At/Po- Birabalavadrapur, Dist- Puri, At Presently working as Deputy Chief Operation Manager (FOIS), E.Co. Railway Rail Sadhan, Chandrasekharpur, Bhubaneswar.
oo. Applicant
-Versus-
1 Union of India represented through General Manager, East Coast Railway, Chandrasekharpur, Bhubaneswar, Dist- Khurda.
2 Chief Personal Officer, East Coast Railway, Chandrasekharpur, Bhubaneswar Dist- Khurda.
3 PK. Samal, Dy Chief Commercial Manager (Claims), East Caast railway, Chandrasekharpur, Bhubaneswar, Dist- Khurda, Pin-751023. 4 No tas . ane "eh SEY Ot SR APS eh SEO OS. Woes, S80 $828, SHG STO a LOY 4 Prector, {Establishment (GP]. Rathway Board Rall Bhawan, New Bi eh dla.
saose . Respondents For the Applicants «Mr, A.Kanungo, Counsel (in all the DAs} For the Respondents 9: Mr. G.R. Verma, Counsel (in all the OAs) O R DER PRAMOD KUMAR DAS, MEMBER {A}:
Since Issues invelved {n all the three Q.As. being interlinked and Interfyined, all the cases wers heard analogously and, for the sake of brevity, this common order is passed, which will govern the field.
Z The case of the applicant (Sri Madan Mohan Pattanayak)} in OA No. 528/20 7 is that hé joined in the S.&.Raih way as ASM in the year 198? and promoted to Tr. DT Lin the year 1996, thereafter, the post of DTT in the year 2001 and Sr. DT) in the year 2003. Consequent upan formation of seven new Railway zones, options were Invi ited vide Board's istter dated 22.08.2002 from Group-B officers, who were regularly appointed to Group-B post after due selection, for transfer to new zones and the fast date of exercising option was fixed to 25.09.2002. S.E.Raflway was trifarcated Inte three scones, Le SLR, CoRR and SISCRiy, on OLD4.2008, fe was made clear that those, wha would be transferred to new zone an transfer basis shall retain cheir original seniority in Group-B % So we"
moe & MA Nos, 260/528, 968 & 879 of COLT category of the parent railway, while those, considered other than the options so invited were transferred to new zones on bottem seniority 1 normal course as per extant rules issued by the Railway Board vide letter dated 03.12.1977. In pursuance of the letter of the CPO/GRC/SERly, dated 28.05.2003, the DRM/KUR vide letter dated 16.06.2003 (A/)} invited option from the existing eligible candidates to appear at the selection for formation of panel against 3094 LDCE quota. The final panel for Greup-B was published, containing the name of the applicant, vide memorandum dated 28.05.2003 (A/2). The applicant was posted as AOM, Khurda, vide order dated 04.06.2004 and he joined the said post on 07.06.2004. The applicant was stated to have been released from Group-C service vide memorandum dated 07.06.2004. Thus, according to him, at the time is his selection to Group-B category, he was working under the jurisdiction of E.Co.Rly., which was part of the S.E.Rly. In response to the option dated 27.12.2004, the applicant opted to accept the bottom seniority in the event of his transfer in Group- B category from S.E.Rly. te E.Co.Rly. Vide railway Board message dated 09.03.2005 (A/S), the applicant was assigned bottom seniority in terms of Railway Board letter dated 03.12.1977 (A/6}, which provides that if an officer is transferred from one railway zone to another, on his/her own request, he will be At NS a Sgt "
are
0.ANos. 2o0/S28, 888 & 678 of 2017 assigned the bottom seniority in new railway zone from the date he takes over the charge. The seniority of the applicant was fixed treating the date of induction as 07.06.2004, Le. the date an which he joined In Group-B service In E.Co.Riy. While the matter stood thus, seniority list of Group-B afficer was published by the E.ColRiy. on 25.08.2005 (A/7) showing the name of the applicant at SL No. 24 wherein his date of induction to Group- B was also shown as 07.06.2004. He was promoted to Sr. Scale (Adhac} on 11.04.2012 and Jr. Time Seale (RTS) on 16.12.2015. Govt. of India, Ministry of Railway, issued instruction/circular on 13.05.2011 (A/8} stating the modalities of pramation fram Group-B to Group-A wherein ft was decided that a common eligibility lst of Group-B officer of each organized service be prepared on all India basis In order of their date of induction to Group-B without disturbing the prevailing Inter se Group-B seniority In each ratlway/unit instead of preparing the seniority railway wise as per the prevailing practice. Accordingly, common eligibility lst of Group-8 officers of each organized service was prepared on all India basis. in terms of the letter dated 15.11.2011 (4/9) of the CPO, E.Co.Rly., provisional seniority list of Group-B officers of Traffic Department, as on 01.01.2010 and 01.01.2011, was prepared and circulated for induction to Group-A/Jr. Scale of IRTS by the Rallway Board. In the final seniority list of
-- oa 5 DANos. 260/528, 558 & BPO of 2017 Group-B officers of Traffic Department published on 01.11.2013 (A/10) by the Railway Board, as on 01.01.2012, his name was shown at SL No. 170 and in the seniority list as on Q1.01.2015, his name was shown at 51 Na. 153 showing that the applicant was promoted to Group-B on 09.03.2005 instead of 07 06.2064.
2.1 According to applicant, in terms of the Railway Board message dated 09.03.2005, since he was holding Group-B post wef 07.06.2004, his seniority was rightly reckoned from 07.06.2004 in terms of railway Board letter dated 03.12.1977. Thus, alteration/change of his seniority pasition ignoring his date of promotion w.e.f 07.06.2004 was done without giving him any epportunity in compliance with the principle of natural justice. Hence, he has submitted representation praying for correction of his seniority position but a letter was issued on 05.08.2014 (A/11) by the Railway Board stating therein as under:
"Sab Seniority lists of Group "B' officers of Traffic Department as on Li2012 and 21.2613 -Representation of $/Sh M.M.Pattanayak, Lingraj Nanda, Bhagabata Panda & Aditya Kamar Taldi Gr 'B' officers of Traffic Department/ ECOR, Ref ECOR letter No. ECOR/Pers/Gaz/OrnB/Representation /TT&C dated O2.07 2014 &14.07,. 2014, SOR BOR The Group °B' seniority bas been integrated on the following nrinciples.
i} Inthe order of Greup 'BS dates of the officers, bul without disturbing the prevailing infer-se seniority on each Railway Zone Pr 'eduction Unit 4} For tiose who have joined the Railways an transfer from other Railways on bottom seniority basis, the dates on which the arders for such transfers are issued by the Railway Board or the actual date on which such officers join the Railways on bottom seniority basis, as the case may be, will be treated as their Group "EB dates for the purpose of integrating the Group 'B' seniority on All India basis
i) When eroup "'S dates happen to be the same, alficers with earler date of birth will rank seniar to those with later date of birth.
2 The request af the above | NOH stoned Tepreseniaty tonists | As ner ten able fora AEE vee iF r mentioned that 0: A 'No, 220) 20 4 4 f ed 'before 8 s still Ie te finality. Hence, ne ral fe can be gp anted te the representationists hased on Ce TZALD's interim order dated SiLS.207T4"
2.3 Further case of the applicant is that the seniority of Group-B officers published on OLAL2013, as on O10L2012 and 01.01.2013, was also under challenge before the Allahabad Bench of the CAT In OA 220/2014, which was disposed of on O7.04.2017 (A/12) directing the railway to assign seniority taking into consideration their actual date of promation to Group-B category.
24 Hence, it is averred that seniority list dated 01.11.2013 published misconceived, which needs to be corrected showing the name of the applicant at the preper place taking inte consideration the date of his promotion to Group-B as 07.08.2004, Similarly, it is averred that the oat Sy \ ee tx GANes, y S28. Shee SPH of BOTS Sanu eS & clreular/instruction issued on 18.05.2011 is bad In law since the conditions put therein disturbs his date of induction, which visits civil consequence affecting his senjarity and promotion. Lastly, it has been averred that after the decision of the CAT, Allahahad Bench, the respondents ought to have revisited the seniority list, shoewing his name at the appropriate stage taking into consideration his induction to Group-B service as 07.06.2004 Instead of 09.03.2005, Ld Counsel for the applicant has alsa relied on the decision of this Tribunal in OA No. 223/2014 disposed of on 31.01.2020 (Susanta Kumar Mishra Vs. UO! & OQrs.). Acearding to the applicant, since the respondents did not do the needful even after the decision of the CAT Allahabad Bench, he has Sled this DA on OS.08.2017 praying for the reliefs as at column 8 of the GA as under:
"CAY Quash the seniority st published an O141.2013 issued by the Railway Board as on OLOL2022 and on 01.01.2013 so far as it relates to the applicant.
(B} Director and for direction be issued ta the respondents to assign the prope oy Seniority position faking note of the date of induct OF GE.2004 as Group eS officer on the same principle and law laid down mm the OA No, 220 of 2014 disposed of on OF.O4.2017 by CAR, Allahabad giving cornplete benefit of the judgment and orders;
(C} And further direction be issued to recast the senfority list with the inal date af induction ta Gy. '8 service with resaltant benefit out OVERS of revised seniority Net in the PIL for the fiture promation in Groupe A' services on the basis of revised seniority lst; 7 ». x ee a
i) Any other direction oo... Se 4 :
g GANea, 260/528 SVR STS oF MAT
3. For the delay in approaching this Tribunal, he has Aled MA No. 487 /2017 praying to condone the delay since the cause of action arose in this GA after the disposal of the OA No. 220/2014 by the CAT, Allahabad B Bench on O7.04¢.2017. This matter was listed on OG.1Q.2017 for consideration of MA No. 487 /2017 so also on the question of admission on the OA. This Bench directed issuance of notice both on the MA as well as on OA,
4. Respondents fled thely counter contesting the case of the applicant.
According to the respondents, the applicant was promoted to Group-5 post on 04.06.2004, Consequent upon carving out of new railway zones, option was invited and on the basis of the option exercised, a list containing 21 Group-B officers for thelr permanent absorption In TTAC department of E.Co.Rly was issued vide order dated 11.11.2008 (8/3). The Raflway Board vide letter dated 25.02.2004 (R/4) issued instruction that no further option of Group-B officers willing te be absorbed in the new sanes be forwarded te Board's office. The CPG, E Co.Rly vide letter dated 01.02.2004 (R/5), invited applications from these Group-B officers of all departments intended to remain in B.Co.Rly for transfer of their lien to £.Co.Rly. on bottem seniority so as to take up the matter with the Railway Board. The applicant, who was continuing in Group-C category, was Q OLA Nos, 260/528, S6B & S19 af ZIT promoted to Group-B post on 04.36.2004. Applicant submitted application on 03.01.2005 for his transfer on own request. Railway Board issued order on 09.03.2005 acceding to his own request transfer with bottom seniority In terms of Railway Board letter dated 03.12.1977. Empanelment of Group-B officers for promotion to Group-A/fr. Level of cight organized services In Indian Railway was done on the basis of the seniority position of Group-B category on each zonal railway upto the vacancy year 2009-10. Fram the vacancy year 2010-11, the system was changed to that of empanelment in Group-A/jr. Scale in each department was no more done zonal rallway wise but on the basis of Group-B seniority of the officers integrated at the all India level. The new system was introduced vide Board's letter dated 13.05.2011 Inter alia stipulating that Integration of Group-B seniority in each debarment is to be dene in order of the date of induction of the officers Into Group-B without disturbing the prevailing inter se seniority on each railway/unit, for the limited purpose of employment in Group-A/Jr. Scale, in other words, the dates from which the Group-B officers are actually holding Hen in the respective raliway/unit, in which thelr seniority is being maintained. Since, the lien of the applicant started after his joining in E.Co.Rby. on 09.03.2005, he has rightly been assigned Group-B seniority from that date, Le. 09.03.2005, There was a om .
S. os Nee Yi i.A.Nus, 260/528, 568 & 370 of AAT specific condition in Railway Board letter dated 13.05.2003 that after formation of fresh panel for selection/LDCE, the empanelled candidate may similarly be posted on either railway depending upon the availability of vacancy but they will have their seniority in Group-B In the parent railway. Therefore, their permanent absorption in the new zones will be decided based on the option on the basis of criteria laid down in Railway Board letter dated 22.08.2002 wherein it was provided that any application other than in response to the options invited for transfer from one zone to other shall be dealt in the normal course as per rules. For those, who joined the Railways on transfer from other Railways on bottom seniority basis, the dates on which the orders for such transfers were issued by the Railway Board or the actual dates on which such officers joIned the Railways on bottom seniority basis, whichever is later, as the case may be, have been treated as their Group-B dates for the purpose of integrating the Group 'B' seniority on All India basis. Further, an interim order dated 31.03.2014 of the CAT/ALD Bench was in force in O.A.No 220/2014 at that time and for that the Railway Board was not able to consider the representation of the applicant, thus, the same was rejected in terms of Railway Board's letter dated 05.08.2014 and on the basis of the principles circulated vide letter dated 13.05.2017 1. The XS Nan %S aye ae ' na SHG S28, SHS APO EDLY CATJALD Bench, vide Order dated O7.04.2017, allowed the O.A.No 220/2014 and quashed and set aside the seniority list dated QL1L2013 only in respect of the applicants therein. The Tribunal did not record any finding with regard to the legal implication of maintain lien and exercise of option for transfer with bottom seniority. Therefore, the said judgment is not applicable to the facts of the present case. It is averred that the Division Bench of this Tribunal dismissed the D.ANo 260 /00036/2014 (Shri Arunjyati Sahoo vrs, UO! & others) fled by the applicant on similar prayer vide order dated 02.01.2017, sa alsa, the CAT, Principal Bench, New Delhi also dismissed such type of case fled by Sri Panna Lal and others in O.ANo.2804/2017 vide order dated 21.08.2017. Ld Counsel for the respondents submitted tht the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Susanta Mishra (supra) has been stayed by the Hon'ble High Court of Orissa vide order dated 23.03.2021 in W.P.(C) NO. 4.1 The sum and substance of the case of the respondents is that the applicant was performing his duty during the period fram 07.06.2004 to 79.03.2005 in Khurda Read Division of B.Ca. Railway, but his len was maintained in 5.E.Railway. In case of own request transfer, one cannot claim his seniority in the new unit prior te the date of the approval by the ~ ee _--
oe Le ee DA Nos, 260/528, 568-8 S70 of BOL?
eect competent authority. As such, his seniority in East Coast Railway has been counted rightly from 09.03.2005. Had the applicant opted for his repatriation, he would have retained his appropriate seniority position, As such, the applicant became the Group-B employee of East Coast Rallway wet, 09.03.2005, Le. the date of Railway Board's order and not from 07.06.2004. In the integrated seniority Hst of Group-B officers issued earlier, inadvertently shown the date as 07.06.2004, as on OLOT2010 and CLOLZO11, which was subsequently found erroneous. Hence, In the revised seniority list as on 01.01.2012 and 01.01.2013 under Annexure- A/i0 to the O.A. the same was rectified as 09.03.2005 instead of 07.06.2004. Accordingly, respondents have prayed for dismissal of the OA.
5. The private respondent was added by the applicant to the OA vide order dated 25.08.2021 but the private respondent neither represented through any advocate nar filed any counter.
6 Heard both MA, filed by the applicant seeking condonation of delay, as well as OA. Ld. Counsel for the respective parties have highlighted the stand taken in their pleadings and on the documents Aled in support of their respective stand. Se fa C.A Nos, 260/528, S68 & S70 of 2047
7. it is found that taking into consideration that the seniority list, in question, and the issue Is subjudice before the Allahabad Bench of the Tribunal in QA No. 220/2014, the grievance of the applicant raised in his representation was held to be not tenable vide order dated 05.08.2014 (A/11)}. The Allahabad Bench of the Tribunal allowed the OA vide order dated 07.04.2017. Since the grievance of the applicant was not redressed he approached this Tribunal en 03.09.2017. Hence, this DA Is held within the period of limitation provided under the AT Act, 1985. Accordingly, MA is allowed and disposed of.
8, In so far as merit of the matter is concerned, we have given out thoughtful consideration to the arguments and perused the record.
9, Admittedly, while the applicant was working in Group-C category under S.E.Rly., he was promoted to Group-B post on 04.06.2004, His own request transfer to E.Co.Rly. was accepted by the Railway Board and he, accordingly, he joined the E.Ca.Rly. on 09.03.2005 on acceptance of the condition that he will be assigned bottom seniority. From the record, it reveals that assignment of the seniority position in Group-B seniority list taking inte consideration the date of joining in the new carved oul zone irrespective of the date of promotian to Group-B in erstwhile railway/principal railway was subject matter of judicial scrutiny before ne Kents LS4 tA Nas, 280/528, 868 & $70 of 2017 this Bench in OA No. 36/2014 by Shri Arunjyoti Sahoo, wherein this Tribunal vide order dated 02.01.2017 held that there was nothing wrong in preparing the seniority list by taking into consideration of the date of transfer /absorption in newly carved out railway zones.
10. The integrated seniority list dated 01.11.2013 of Group-B officers, prepared taking into consideration the date of joining in the new zone was challenged before the Allahabad Bench of the Tribunal in OA 2200/2014 ($.M.Pandey & Anr. Vs. UOI & Ors.), The Allahabad Bench of the Tribunal placing reliance on the decision of the Jodhpur Bench of the CAT in DA 64/2007, Jabalpur Bench of the Tribunal in OA Nos. 7, 8, 9, 25 and 38 of 2006, which was upheld by the Hon'ble High Court of Jabalpur, and Principal Bench of the Tribunal in OA No. 1563/2016 on the same Issue, quashed the seniority list dated 01.11.2013 with a direction to assign the seniority taking into consideration the date of taking over the charge of Group-B officer and issue revised seniority list. Further, it was directed that after issuing the revised seniority list, DPC be convened for promotion to Group-A /Jr. Scale on the basis of corrected seniority pasition. It is not the case of the respondents that the above order has been stayed or set w aside by any higher court. aN ee None ¥ 16 PA Nog 260/528, 865 & N70 of 2047
11. The CAT, Principal Bench, in OA No. 2804/2017 dismissed the claim made by the applicant therein for preparing the Group-B seniority list taking into consideration the date of their promotion to Group-5 irrespective of the date of joining the new railway zone vide order dated 21.08.2017 but in this case the decisions rendered in the aforesaid cases have not been dealt with.
12. Again similar matter came up before this Bench in OA No. 223/2014 filed by Susanta Mishra (supra). This Tribunal took note of a letter issued by the Railway Board vide No. B (GP}/2009/1 {97 dated 13.05.2011 and allowed the OA. vide order dated 31.01.2020. Relevant portion of the decision {s relevant and reproduced herein below:
"42 Fram the pleadings of the parties, the short point to be decided in this OA. is whether the impugned seniority lists, the legality af which have been called in question in the instant O.A. have been prepared in conformity with the Railway Board's letter No. E(GP)/2008/1/97 dated 2 ¢ 12052011 In this cannection, it would be profitabie te extract hereunder the gist of the Railway Board's letter.
*Sub: Promotion from Group 'B' to group "A'/fr Seale ef organized services - Procedure for conducting DPCs, Reference Bourd's letter NaE(GP) 97/1 f§ dated 7.7.97 and 69.2002 and NoE(GP)/Z005/1/2 dated 29.68.2007 on the above subject
2. As per existing practice, while promoting Group 'BR' officers to Group 'a'/frSeale, Railway-wise Eligibility Lists for each department in the order af Group "B' sentority are prepared strictly in arcordance with the seniority Usts provided by the individual Reilways/Units. The UPSC also Ry ., .
Dn at oe:
oA Nos, 260/888, S6B & SPD af A?
provides Roilway-wise panels for Group AY aocendingty we _ The issue of improving the existing system has been: under considera jon of Raflway Board for quite same Ume. After detailed deliberations with IRPOF, the Board have decided thet a common ENgibiity List of Group B° officers af each organized service may be prepared on All indie a basis in the vrder of their dates of induction into Group 'BY without di ist urbing the prevailing inlerse Group fl "seniority on euch Railway/Unit, fstead of preparing the same Huilaywise as per the existing practice.
4, On the basis of a common Eligibility List, UPSC wil provide a common Group 'A//Jrdcale panel on Al India basis for euch service. The procedure will, however, have limited application to the extent of forming only Group Ver Scale panels on AU india basis, and will be effective Fi from ¥ACUNCY Fear r 2010-11 onwards.
& The abave revised DPC procedure may be circulated for information and guidance of all concerned"
TR. The above Railway Board's letter makes it clear that fhe existing practice af 3 ration of Raflwayovise Blgibility Lists far each Depa ry nent in order of Group B seniarity strictly in ae cordane e with the seniarity ists provided by she indiiddual Railway Unis is to pe dispensed with wiew to improving the existing systen by preparing a common Eligibility List af Graup 'B apieers un im order of thelr dates af induction Into Group 'Bi without disturbing te prevailing iter-se Group-B seniority. Bul, it appears that whereay vy '8 is the provisional senlority list af Graup-8 Officers of Civil Engineering Departm ent as on LL@ore & @Le1aoi3 for forming the panel i. Group 'A'/inScale of i p :
" # "y .
IRSE for the vacancy years 2012-13 & SOrs-34, Afi a is the Anal : 3 S. yay eg ox ped ihe werereiecey PE x whe oy pete 25"
seniority list thereof and while preparing Ghose seniongy Nats, the same 3 has been prepared in contravention of Rail hewy Bours ts letter dated TROS.2071, which disnels the date af induction af te applicant ity Group-B. In ether words, to make it mere conspicueus, after ute Railway Board's letter dated 13.05.2011 (Afii} came to be issued srescribing a common Eligh heh ity } List ef Group B officers of each OZ ed service fo be prepare ed on All india basis, in arder af their dates of induction inte Group 8 without disturbing the prevailing liter se Group B seniority an each Railway/Unit, the date af induction of the applicant in Group-B with effect from OL0L 2003 has nog been token es 5:
18 OA Nos. 260/528, SHBG 878 of 217counter-reply that the phrase used in the Railway Board's letter dated i Group 'RB' cannotes the dates from which the Group 'B afficers are actually holding lien in the respective Ratlway/Units in which their sentority is being maintained, at the same time, they became oblivious of publication af a common Eligibility Lists in order of induction into Group B, without disturbing the preva fling inter-se Group B seniority en each Railway and by implication, they published Railway-wise seniority listas was prevalent earlier. The date of induction for the purpose of a common eligibility list is the date uf joining as Group-B officer and inter se seniority in this context means ~ the date on which the applicant or sinularly situated persons stood transferred to East Coast Railway by virtue of the Railway Board's order consequent upon options exercised. There is no doubt that the Respondents by such action have not adhered to the instructions issued by the Railway Beard vide fetter dated 13.05.2011, and instead of publishing a common Eligibility List having reyard to the date(s) of induction of the incumbents into Group-B without disturbing their Inter se seniority, have prepared the Railway-wise seniority list in accordance with the seniority lists provided by the individual Railway/Units and as such, there has been @ complete departure from the instructions issued by the Railway Board for the purpose af promotion from Group B to Group Affr. Scale of organized services on the hasis of a common Elgibilty List.
14, It is the settled principle of law that if something has to be done in a particular manner, the same has io be done in that manner anly and not otherwise. Besides the above, the Respandent-Railways published the final seniority list vide A/IU dated 77.12.2013 withaut ever considering the representation dated 01.12.2013 {4/9} submitted by the applicant in pursuance of provisional senfority list dated 24.09.2013 (A/8). Besides, respondents have not stated anything in the counter-reply as to how Shri Wasir sing h, whose name did not figure int the Seniority List of Group-B officers o ff Civil Engineering Deparoment of Fast Coast Railway as on OL0L2011 (A/S] could find place in the provisional seniority list at A/S follawed by final seniority list at A f10, his date of induction as Group-B being on 10.01.2003, Le, after the induction of the applicant an 02.01.2008, which gives a delicate hints af suppression of material facts. The contentions af the respondents in the counter that the date of induction inte Group-B service means the date from which the Group-B officers are holding len In the respective weet:
Braet Railways, are not in accordance with the Railway Board Circular dated ISOS,.201L
15. We have gone through the decisions cited hy the parties pro et contra, Since m the instant case, the point to ke decided is whether the #80 fority list which is the subject matter of dispute has been prepat red in conformity with the Railway Board's fetter Noe S{GP [2009 41, foe dated 12 05.2011 and this point having not been decided in uny of those decisions, this Tribanal is net inclined te place reliance on fhe same However, as discussed abave, if is a fact that a common el igibiligy list of Group 'BY officers on All India basis which was in itended fo be published in the order of their dates of induction inte Group 'B' without distu bing the prevailing inter-se Group-8 seniority by virtue af Railway Bourd's fetter dated 18.05.2011 has not been so prepared, 16 In view of the discussions held ubave, we would direct Regpandent Nog, he, the DNrector, Establishment { inka Rolliwey Board tg re-
examine the issue in the light of the discussions held above and suitably "
incorporate the name of U the applicant for the purpose af conunan eligibility list ac Af 10 having regard fo his date of induction in Greup-8 service, without disturbing inter se seniority, as mandated in Railway Roard's letter dated 13.05.2011, by giving due notice to the incumbents who ore Hkely te be affected there by and recast the said seniority list within @ period of 120 days from the date of recerpt of Gis order.
33 In the result, the OA is allowed as above, with no order ag to coats"
12. The aforesaid order has been challenged b the respondents in W.P{C} No, 25633/2020 and, admittedly, the Hon'ble High Court of Orissa stayed the order and the matter is subju udice for final adjudication.
i4. In the present case, the applicant's representation for showing him in the integrated seniority Hst at the appropriate place taking inte consideration his date of promotion to Group-B officer was hel id by the Railway Board not tenable in accordance with the Railway Board z ' x ont se UA Mos, FSO SEES, SAN & STU af POF onstruction and, that, OA No. 220/2014 was still subjudice before the Allahabad Bench. Admittedly, the Allahabad Bench of the Tribunal vide order 07.04.2017 quashed the seniority list dated O11 2013 with direction to issue the correct seniority list by taking into consideration the date af promotion to Group-B past. Therefore, the Respondents-Railway Board ought to have revised the seniority list of the applicant in compliance of the arder of the present applicant. We also find that this Tribunal in QA No. 2238/2014 dealt with the issue exhaus stively and discussed as to how and why the earlier order of this Tribunal in OA No. 36/2014 filed by Shri Arunjyot! Sahoo was not applicable and endorsed the view taken by the ANahabad Bench of the Tribunal referred to above. We do not see any distinguished feature to depart from the view taken by the Alahabad Bench of the Tribunal in OA 220/2014 and of this Bench | OA 2253/2014. Accordingly, we hole that the | ntegrated seniority Hst of the applicant In Group-B cadre needs to be revisit ited /revised by placing bis name at the appropriate place taking into consideration his date of promotion te Group-B and not from the date when he joined in the carved out ECo.Rly.
t., 4S. te is seen that at the ime when option was invited upon triurcation af the SE. Riy,, the spolicant was a Greup-C emp lnyee but he, was works mE te --
Xe e lee METER MH wh Ry SA Nos, 2607538, S88 Nl within the territorial jurisdiction of the carved out E.Co.Rly, Bhubaneswar. The fate of the Group-C employees, whe did not apt but were working within the territorial jurisdiction of the E.Co.Rly, is not forthcoming fram the record. The status of the applicant as a Group-C employee ought to have been decided but not decided, Subsequently, he exercised his option and absorbed in E.Co.Rly in Group-B cadre. As per the standing Instruction of the Railway, the zone wise seniority Hst was published by E.Co.Riy wherein the date of promotion to Group-B was shown as 07.06.2004, Le. the date of panel issued on 04.06.2004 by the CPQ, £.Co.Riv,, Nhurda. tn the letter of the Railway Board dated 13.05.2011, i was stated that a common cligibility st of Group-8 officers of each organized service may be prepared on All India basis, in the order of their dates of induction mto Group-B' without disturbing the prevailing inter-se Group 'B' seniority on each Railway /Unit, instead of preparing the same Railway-wise as per the existing practice. Thus, while the aforesaid provision was in force, the Railway Board published the provisional and final gradation list of Group- 8 cadre showing the date of promotion of the applicant as OO.03.2005, Le. the date of induction to B.Co.Rly. in place of his actual date af promotion to Group-B as 07.06.2004 without giving any opportunity to the applicant.
This Court is of the opiion that if a person, who is posted, within the N --_ oe = Net"
PRR 2 . eh Eee Sa Ma oe gs ok is. Nos, BAGS, S68 & SFO af aU Pe territorial jurisdiction of newly carved out zonal railway in Group-C and for the empanelment as Group-B with date of empanebment, in the same zonal raflway, no option was to be required for absorption In newly created sonal railway. Therefore, Railway Board letter assigning bottom seniority to the applicant at the same place of posting with effect from
09.03.2005, Le. the date of issue of such letter, is not relevant and seniority assigned by the zonal railway, Le. E.Co.Rly, Le from 07.06.2004 is four to be in order and ought not to have been altered by the Railway Board for the purpose of eligibility list for promotion to Group-s,
16. tis needless to state that fair play is part of public policy and a guarantee for justice to an employee. In our system of Rule of Law, every social agency conferred with power is required to act fairly so that social action would be just, and there would be furtherance of the well-being of citizens. Natural justice generally requires that persons Hable te be directly affected by proposed administrative acts, decisions or proceedings be given adequate notice ef what is proposed so that they may be in a position (a) to make representation on their own behalf (b) or to appear ata hearing or enquiry Gf one is held}; and (c} effectivety to prepare their own case and to answer the case {ifany} they had to meet.
Even when a State agency acts administratively, rules of natural justice, Bee _ ae ee Cua Nog. ZAU/SES, SEER SFG ap ani?
"B Lead would apply. Thus, the change of the date, though adversely affects the mterest of the applicant, he was not pu to any prier notice giving him opportunity fo have his say. Another important aspect of the matter, which cannot be brash aside is that the respondents found the representation of the applicant not tenable in the letter dated 05.08.2014 (A/11) hy stating that "for those who have joined the railways on trans er from other Railways on bottom seniority basis, the dates an which the arders for such transfers are issued by the Railway Board or the actual date on which such officers join the Railways on bottom seniority basis, a8 the case may be, will be treated as their Group 'BY dates for the purpose of integrating the Granp 'B' seriarigy on Al India basis." T his was nat the condition stipulated in the instruction af the Railway Board dated 43.05.2011. On the above score, the preparation of the Gradation list of Group-B officers by the Raitlway Board changing the date of empaneiment as Group-B adverse to their interest without giving opportunity, is fourid ro he erroneous one.
17. For academic purpase, it may be recorded that the Hon'ble Supreme court in the case of Prem Kamar Vernia v. Union of India, (f1998) 5 5cc A 3 4S7], held that the pric vipal mandate of the ride is thet seniority is the basis of date ef appointment ta the post or grade.
determined on t A oN wee Nate 4 e . . a . , a4 GLANes. 260/528, $68 & 970 af 2017 purther, it has been held in Civil Appeal No. 3792 of 2019 (Arising out of sLP (C} No, 31728/2018) in the case of Pratibha Rani & Ors Vs UOI& Ors that the service rendered in the previous posting is liable to be counted in the new posting areas for purposes of eligibility for consideration of promotion.
18. In view of the discussions made above, the seniority list published on 01.11.2013 is hereby quashed in respect of the applicant with direction to publish revised seniority list showing the name of the applicant at the appropriate place taking into consideration his date of induction to Group- B service on 07.06.2004 and consider the case of the applicant for Group-A taking into consideration his date of promotion to Group-B service on 67.06.2004 as per the revised seniority list to be issued as directed above. he above direction is also to be carried out based on the final outcome of che W.P(C} No. 25633/2020 pending before the Hon'ble High Court of Orissa.
OA No, 568/2017 i. In this case, the applicant was promoted to Group-B and joined S.E.Rly. as ACM, Head Quarter, Bhubaneswar on 20.08.2004 and joined the E.Co.Rly on 09.03.2005. His seniority was fixed taking into consideration *%, .
"Ss we Be ' 34 $s O4Nos. 260/828, S66 & SPQ of AGT?
his date of joining in E.Co.Rly in Group-B cadre, which has been challenged by the applicant in this OA with the prayer as in the QA No. 528/201.
fi In view of the detailed discussions made in OA Na Sze/2017, the seniority list published on 01.11.2013 is hereby quashed in respect of the te 8 applicant with direction to publish revised seniority lst showing the name of the applicant at the appropriate place taking Inte consideration his date of induction to Group-8 service on 20.08.2004 and consider the case of the applicant for Group-A taking inte consideration his date of promotion to Group-B service on 20.08.2004 as per the revised seniority Hst to be issued as directed above. The above direction is also to be carried out based on the final outcome of the W.P.(C) Na. 25633 /2020 pending before the Hon'ble High Court of Orissa, OA No. 5700/2017 a. fn this case, the applicant was promoted to Group-B and joined S.E.Rly. as ACM {Claim}, Head Quarter, Bhubaneswar on 20.07.2004 and joined the E.lo.Rly on 09.03.2005. His seniority was fixed taking into consideration his date of joining in E.Co.Rly in Group-8 cadre, which has been challenged by the applicant in this OA with the prayer as in the OA No. 5528/2017. NN oy es woe - ce geese ees Ur 20 G.A Nos. 260/598, 868 & SPO of FOL? b. In view of the detailed discussions made in OA No.S28/2017, the seniority list published on O1.11.2015 is hereby quashed in respect of the applicant with direction to publish revised seniority Nst showing the name of the applicant at the appropriate place taking into consideration his date of induction to Group-B service on 20.07 2004 and consider the case of the applicant for Group-A taking into consideration his date of promotion ta Group-B service on 20.07.2004 as per the revised seniority list to be issued as directed above. The above direction Is also to be carried out based on the final outcome of the WOP.(C) No. 25633 /2020 pending before the Hon'ble High Court of Orissa.
{¥.. In the resull, all the GAs and MAs stand allowed to the extent stated above, There shall be no order as to casts.
Ste.
5 Rs.
MILE 12° bt pees o-
ys ; ~ A en "
{Rajnish Kumar Rat) (Pramod Kumar Das) Member (udl} Member (Admn.) th RK/PS