Punjab-Haryana High Court
Union Of India vs Harbhajan Singh And Another on 10 July, 2008
Equivalent citations: 2009 LAB. I. C. (NOC) 291 (P. & H.), 2009 (3) AJHAR (NOC) 827 (P. & H.)
Author: Hemant Gupta
Bench: Hemant Gupta, Mohinder Pal
CWP No.18870 of 2004 (1)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CWP No.18870 of 2004
Date of Decision: 10.7.2008
Union of India ......Petitioner
Versus
Harbhajan Singh and another .....Respondents
Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHINDER PAL
Present: Shri Puneet Jindal, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Shri T.P. Singh, Advocate, for respondent No.1.
1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the
judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?
HEMANT GUPTA, J.
The challenge in the present writ petition is to an order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh (for short `the Tribunal') on 17.8.2004, whereby an Original Application filed by respondent-Harbhajan (hereinafter referred to as `the applicant') was allowed.
The applicant was selected as a Permanent Way Inspector, vide letter dated 11.10.1995. He joined on 19.12.1995 at Allahabad Division of the Northern Railway. Subsequently, he sought his transfer to Ambala Division. He was permitted to do so and he joined at Ambala on 30.7.1997 at the bottom of seniority. It may be mentioned that the post of Permanent Way Inspector is a Group `C' post.
The Group `C' employees are entitled to be promoted to Group `B'. There are two promotional channels. 70% of Group CWP No.18870 of 2004 (2) `B' posts are required to be filled up by the Limited Departmental Competitive Examination and remaining 30% on the basis of selection of eligible Group `C' employees.
It has come on record that 92 Group `B' posts fell vacant for the period 1.12.2002 to 31.3.2005. As per merit, the panels of 308 candidates, including the candidates from general and reserved categories and 75 candidates as wait list candidates, were prepared. However, the name of the applicant was not part of the panel, which led to filing of an Original Application before the Tribunal. The Tribunal has allowed such application on 17.8.2004, which order is subject matter of challenge in the present writ petition.
The promotion to Group `B' posts is governed by Chapter 2 of the Indian Railway Establishment Manual Volume-I. The relevant Rules read under:-
"201.1. All vacancies in Group `B' are filled by promotion on the basis of selection of eligible Group `C' employees and also on the basis of Limited Departmental Competitive Examination, wherever the scheme is in force. Where the scheme of LDCE is in force, selection is held to fill 75% of the vacancies and LDCE is held to fill the remaining 25% of the vacancies.
203.1. Reservation in favour of SCs/STs.-
Rules of reservation apply in filling the
vacancies in Group `B' on the basis of
selection. Only those eligible SCs/STs who
are in the Zone of consideration determined in accordance with the rules, should be called for CWP No.18870 of 2004 (3) the selection. There is no carry forward of the element of reservation if either SCs/STs are not available in the zone of consideration or the available SCs/STs have not qualified for appointment against the reserved vacancies. In such situations the reserved vacancy should be dereserved and filled only after dereservation.
203.4. Zone of consideration.- The number of employees to be called for the selection will be in accordance with the sliding scale in the order of seniority as shown below-
1. vacancies - 5 employees.
2. Vacancies - 8 employees.
3. Vacancies - 10 employees.
4. Vacancies and above - employees equal to three times and number of vacancies. 203.5. Since employees from the different streams will be eligible to appear for the selection, their inter-se seniority for purposes of the selection should be determined on the basis of total length of non fortuitous service rendered in grade Rs.2000-3200 (R.S.) and above. In other words the date of appointment in the grade Rs.2000-3200 (R.S.) on a non fortuitous basis will be criterion. 203.6. If adequate number of SCs/STs are not available within the field so determined for consideration against reserved vacancies the field should be extended to five times the CWP No.18870 of 2004 (4) number of vacancies and only those SCs/STs coming in the extended field (and not the others) should be considered."
The learned Tribunal allowed the Original Application, relying upon Rule 203.5 to hold that the petitioner is eligible on the basis of his appointment in the year 1995 under the Allahabad Division and, thus, he falls within the zone of consideration. However, the stand of the petitioner before the learned Tribunal as also before this Court is that the applicant would be entitled to his seniority from the date of his appointment with the Ambala Division in the year 1997 and on the basis of such appointment, he does not fall within the zone of consideration of employees. It is contended that since the name of the applicant does not fall within the three times of the number of vacancies available on the basis of seniority in the Ambala Division, therefore, his name could not be forwarded to the Northern Railways for the purposes of consideration for empanelment for appointment to Group `B' posts.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties, we do not find any merit in the present writ petition. The number of the posts in Group `B' are at the zonal level. There is no bifurcation of the posts to each division. Once, the posts are available at the zonal level, the panel of eligible candidates has to be prepared on the basis of eligibility at the zonal level alone. Since the selection is to be made at the zonal level in response to the vacancies available at the zonal level, the recommendations made at the divisional level are not relevant. It is the date of appointment against Group `C' post which is relevant for determining the eligibility to be within the zone of consideration. Though the applicant has lost his seniority on account of his transfer to the CWP No.18870 of 2004 (5) Ambala Division, but such loss of seniority does not amount to loss of the service, which he rendered with Allahabad Division before his transfer to the Ambala Division. The petitioner falls within the zone of consideration in terms of Rule 203.5 of the Manual having been appointed against Group `C' post in the year 1995. The employees of different streams are eligible to be promoted against 70% posts, therefore, the inter-se seniority for the purposes of selection is to be determined from the date of appointment in terms of Rule 203.5 of the Manual.
In view of the above, we do not find any merit in the present writ petition. Hence, the same is dismissed with no order as to costs.
(HEMANT GUPTA) JUDGE (MOHINDER PAL) JUDGE 10.7.2008 ds