Central Administrative Tribunal - Hyderabad
Ch Sudarshan Rao vs M/O Railways on 11 November, 2020
a CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH OA/O21/OIS4E/2014 HYDERABAD, this the 11" day of November, 2620, Hon'ble Mr. Ashish Kalia, Judi. Member Hon' ble Mr. BV. Sudhakar, Admn. Member / 1.Ch. Sudarshan Rao S/o Uppalaiah, Aged 32 years, Ove : Technician Grade-I, O/o The Senior Divisional Electrical Engineer, Electric Loco Shed, South Central Railway, Kazipet.
2.M. Sudhakar S/o Venkateswar, Aged 49 years, O/o The Senior Divisional Electrical Engineer, Electric Loco Shed, South Central Railway, Kazipet.
3. B.Sampath Kumar S/o Laxmaiah, Aged 47 years, O/o The Senior Divisional Electrical Engineer, Electric Loco Shed, South Central Railway, Kazipet.
4. D. Kumara Swamy S/o Komaraiah, Aged 47 years, O/o The Senior Divisional Electrical Engineer, Electric Loco Shed, South Central Railway, Kazipet.
3.T.Narasing Rao S/o Kommath, Aged 41 years, Go The Senior Divisional Electrical Engineer, Electric Loco Shed, South Central Railway,Kazipet. . Applicants (By Advocate > Mr.K.R.K.V Prasad)
1.Union of India represented by The Chairman, Ministry of Railways, Railway Board, Rail Bhavan, New Delhi,
2. The General Manager, South Central Railway, Rall Ndayam, Secunderabad.
Page Dof $8 GA 1341/2014 "3. The Chief Personnel Officer,Rail Nilayam, +? South Central Railway, Secunderabad.
4, The Divisional Railway Manager, Secunderabad Division, South Central Railway, Sanchalan Bhavan, Secunderabad.
§. The Senior Divisional Personnel Officer, Secunderabad Division, South Central Railway, Sanchalan Bhavan, Secunderabad.
_ Respondents {By Advocate : Mrs.A.P.Lakshmi, SC for Railways) Page 2 of 16 OA 1341/2014 QRAL GRDOER (As per Hon'ble Mr.B.V Sudhakar, Administrative Member} Throuch Video Conferencing:
2 The O.A. has been filed, questioning the re-structuring policy of the respondent's organization.
& SC categories, are working as Technician Gr] with Grade Pay of Rs.2800/- in Mechanical Wing of Electric Loca Shed, Kazipet. The applicants are eligible to be promoted as Sr. Technician with Grade Pay of Rs.4200/-. The Railway Board has come up with a policy of re-structuring of certain Group"C' cadres vide RBE No.102/2013 dated 8.10.2013. In the said policy circular, the percentage distribution against the said re- structuring of cadres in respect of artisan staff has been mentioned under the head 'Engineering Department including Workshop'. The percentage distribution of cadres in respect of artisan staff under the said head was given grade pay-wise. Para 4 of the circular clearly states that the existing classification remains unchanged and accordingly the selection will be based only on scrutiny of service record and confidential reports. In para 4.4 it was also specified that all vacancies arising purely due to the cadre re- structuring shall be filled up by senior employees, who would be given the benefit of promotion wef. 15.2013, In respect of the Senior Technician posts, the percentage has increased from 8 to 16 and, therefore, the number of vacancies to be filled up after re-structuring has to be done after examining the sanctions properly and also ensuring revised percentage distribution. The respondents have issued a Memo on 12.5.2014, giving the Page 3 of 10 cS O& 1341/2014 @tails of percentage distribution amongst various cadres and posts 3 dailable in each grade. The position in respect of Senior Technician posts in Mechanical Wings was shown incorrectly, resulting in reduction of number of vacancies. The distribution of artisan staff should be in the ratio of 60:40, The sanctioned staff of artisan staff in Electric Loco Shed as on \1.5.2013 was wrongly shown as 325. The number of posts to be operated 'in the Electrical & Mechanical Wings in the ratio af 60:40 would come to 195 & 130 respectively. The revised percentage distribution taking 130 posts in Mechanical Wing would appear as 21, 57, 26 & 26 for the four grades. The 21 posts shown for Senior Technicians were reduced ta 17 by surrendering 3 posts. There are 6 Senior Technicians in position. As a result, there should be 11 balance posts available for promotion from the feeder cadre i.e. Technician Gr] whereas in Memo dated 16.9.2014 issued by the respondents, only 3 employees were promoted as Senior Technicians, thereby 9 Technician Gr.J employees were deprived of promotional opportunity. This has happened because of surrendering of 5 posts. If the correct vacancy position were to be taken into account after fixing sanctions correctly w.r.t, 16% revised percentage of distribution in Sr. Technician grade, the names of the applicants, who are at SLNo.15, 16, 17, 18 & 19 in the seniority list of Technician Gr.t would come up for selection as Sr. Technician. Even if it is according to the sanctions, applicants would have been selected but fer the surrendering of the 5 posts. The surrendering of 5 posts has reduced the revised percentage distribution from 16% to 11%. Para 12.1 of the Cireular envisages that there should be matching savings, which is misconstrued. An incompetent authority has Page 4 of 19 OA 1341/2014 taken action. Aggrieved over the improper re-distribution and non-grap promotion, the O.A. has been filed.
4. The contentions of the applicants are that the distribution of pasts has not been done in tune with the spirit of re-structuring. The revised _percentage of posts has decreased from 16% to 11%. The respondents have ; } surrendered 5 posts and thereby the promotions of the applicants in Technician Gri was denied, Surrendering of pasts in Senior Technician grade has led to more posts in Technician Gr. and quicker promotion from GrJl to Gri, for those employees who did not even fulfill the residency period of two years, The improper manner of re-structuring has led to stagnation in Technician Gr.l. The purpose of re-structuring is thereby defeated. The senior employees not getting promotion has created a Class within a Class. Some employees are getting promotion and some are denied. Therefore, those who did not get the promotion have been discriminated because of the improper implementation of the re-structuring policy. The applicants represented pointing out the inaccuracy and i was also pointed out that the zone of consideration was not properly fixed.
"
5. Respondents in their reply statement state that the applicants are working in Technician Gr.l and they were not coming in the zone of consideration to be considered for the post of Sr. Technician, Mechanical Wing under cadre restructuring policy of 2013. Among the § applicants, 3 applicants are from SC category and the other two are from UR category. As per the Railway Board order in regard to restructuring vide RBE No.102/2013, the revised percentage of cadre re-structuring of artisan stat Page § of 19
36) Ce Cae OA 1344/2014 EN - « ye . nN 6 ey re a " an .
o\Mechanical Wing is as indicated im a tabular form in Para 4 of reply tees x statement, pant toe Pare:
The sanctioned strength of Mechanical Wing, Kazipet was worked out vide Memo 12.5.2014. The Senior Technician posts were filled up by eligible employees from Technician Gr.I posts. The respondents have ~ Jsubmitted that while calculating the revised percentage of posts in Mechanical Wing, Kazipet, the pasts of 50% upgraded Group-D posts to x Technician GrJll are not taken into account for calculating the revised percentage in terms of item no.18 of CPO/SC Circular No.100/2013. Therefore, there is a variation in the increased percentage compared to the sanctioned strength of artisan staff of Mechanical Wing as on {.1).2013. The 33 upgraded posts of Group-D as Technician Gr-Ill were nat taken inte account in Restructuring, 2013 as per the instructions submitted above. The upgraded 33 posts are to be kept as a separate block and nat to be inchided for restructuring of cadres. The distribution of posts among Mechanical Wings was circulated vide DRM letter dated 13.1.2013, excluding the 50% upgraded posts of Technician Gr.IIl. The same is indicated in Para 6 of the reply statement in a tabular form.
Based on the Board's instructions, restructuring has been done after obtaining the approval of the concerned authority. Aceordingly, 3 vacancies have been filled up with community break up of UR-3, SC-1 & ST-1. One UR vacancy was filled against an existing vacancy as per the post based roster under cadre restructuring. The senior mest employees in the category of Technician Gr.J in Mechanical Wing were considered for promotion by the DPC and the applicants were junior to them. The select Page 6 of 10 OA 1341/2014 list was published on 16.9.2014, which is in order, The cadre restructuring - is a self-financial scheme as per the Railway Board's Circular RBE No.102/2013.
6. Heard Sri K.R.K.V. Prasad, learned counsel for the applicants and Smt. A.P. Lakshmi, learned counsel for the respondents, and perused the poner jeadings on record.
7, 1 The issue involved as per the applicants is that due to re-structuring, they did not get the benefit of promotion. On going into the details, we find that the Railway Board has come out with a policy of re-structuring the cadres on 8.10.2013. As per the said policy, the percentage distribution of cadres in respect of artisan staff has been changed as given in the table hereunder:
Category PB GP Existing % | Revised % Sr. Tech PB-2 4200 8 16 Tech-T PB-1 2800 4p Tech-Il PB-1 | 2400. 26 20 Tech-Ill PB-1 joo) BS 20 As can be seen in the table, the revised percentage in respect of Senior Technicians in the Grade Pay of Rs.4200/- has increased from 8 to 16%. The expectation of the applicants is that due to the increase in the percentage of posts in Senior Technician cadre, their opportunities for promotion should increase. Though the applicants have claimed that the total sanctioned strength of the Mechanical Wing of Kazipet was wrongly shown as 325, but they did not produce any document to state that it Is oN ' mY : a ica * Page 7 of 10 OA 1947/2014 A "wrong. The respondents per contra stated that the sanctioned strength is {40 and that it is perfectly correct. Based on the restructuring policy, the respondents have worked out the revised sanctioned strength in different artisan cadres as under:
Sanction prior to | Revised Sanctioned | No. of posts Sanctioned a Percentage | Strengthas per | surrendered | Strength as on Category restructuring revised OLIL2O13 percentage afier surrender Sr. Tech 7 16 17 5 12 Tech-I 29 44 47 6 4] Tech-Il 19 20 22 22 Teeh-lil $2433 20 21433 214338 upgraded upgraded pasts POSES Total 1074+-33=140 100 107+33=140 Vi 9H733= 1 29 i The table indicates that the number of posts in Senior Techriician cadre have been increased from 7 to 17. This increase as it is if it were to be kept undisturbed, the opportunity for more employees from the cadre of Technician Gr to get promoted would have been enhanced. However, the restructuring is a policy matter of the respondent's organization. Always restructuring is accompanied with matching savings. The matching savings would come in the form of surrendering certain posts in certain cadres amongst the cadres which have been considered for restructuring. In the instant case, the respondents have surrendered 5 posts of Senior Technician. As a result, the number of posts available for filling up after restructuring Is
12. The number of employees in position was 7 and the remaining 3 posts due to restructuring were filled up by constituting DPC. The community-
wise break up is UR-3, SC-1 & ST-1, The select list was published on Page 8 of 10 & crete applicants state that surrendering of 5 vacancies led to denial of promotional opportunity to them. As was stated supra, the restructuring tet policy has an embedded element of surrendering certain posts in certain ~. cadres. Unless that exercise is done, the very concept of restructuring ye cannot be given effect to. Moreover, it is a matter which is in the domain " of policy decision. Hon'ble Supreme Court in Union af India v. Pushpa Rani (2008) 9 SCC 242 has observed that when the Govt. organizations undertake restructuring, the Tribunal/ Courts should not interfere in such matters. The relevant portion is extracted hereunder:
"Before parting with this aspect of the case, we consider if necessary to reiterate the settled legal position that matters relating fe creation and abolition of posts, formation and sfructuringrestructuring of cadres, prescribing the source mode of recruitment and qualifications, criteria of selection, evaluation of service records of the employees fall within the exclusive domain of the employer. iFhart steps should be taken for improving efficiency of the adniinistration is alsa the preserve of the employer. The power of judicial review can de exercived in such matters only if if is shown thet the action af the employer in contrary fa GHy constitutional or statutory praviston or is parenily arbiwrary or is vitiated due to mata fides. xxx"
WW The applicants have also raised a point stating that there is a variation in the mamber of posts allocated to each cadre after restructuring. They raised a valid point. However, it has been properly responded to by the respondents stating that the revised percentage of pasts of artisans in Mechanical Wing of GLS/KZB, the posts of 50% upgraded Group-D posts to Technician-III are not taken into account for calculating the revised percentage in terms of item no.18 of CPO/SC Circular No.100/2013. As these 33 upgraded Group-D posts as Technician Grill were not taken into account for Restructuring-2013, the variation is obviously seen. The same Page 9 of 1 OA 1347/2014 respondents was in tune with the Restr wturing Policy envisaged by the Railway Board. Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the respondents should have at least gone into the adverse impact of restructuring which set in stagnation in the cadre of Senior Technician.
: restructuring policy. By not doing so, learned eounsel for the applicants stated that the very objective of restructuring policy has been defeated. We are not in agreement with the argument of the learned counsel for the applicants because the applicants have not secured promotion would not mean that there is some defect with the restructuring policy. We observe that certain other employees got promoted from Technician Grill to Technician Grd and that too without fulfilling the residency period of Iwo years in the said grade, The restructuring policy is meant for providing promotional opportunities to different cadres and not to one cadre as has been tried to be argued by the learned counsel for the applicants. Overall promotional opportunities have enhanced and we do not find any error in implementing the restructuring policy by the respondents. As has been abserved by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the Tribunals have a very limrtec role in interfering with matters of restructuring. Therefore, for the facts stated above and in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, we do not find any merit in the O.A. Hence, the same is dismissed ss with no order as to cost ht Va Mae DOES oe]