Allahabad High Court
Union Of India Thru G.M. N.C.Railway ... vs Zafar Ahmad And Others on 9 December, 2019
Bench: Sudhir Agarwal, Rajeev Misra
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 34 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 45135 of 2011 Petitioner :- Union Of India Thru G.M. N.C.Railway Allahabad And Others Respondent :- Zafar Ahmad and others Counsel for Petitioner :- A.K.Gaur, Rajnish Kumar Rai Counsel for Respondent :- Ashish Srivastava, S.C., Sunil Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal,J.
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
1. Heard Sri Dinesh Kumar Rai, learned counsel for petitioners. None appeared for respondents 1 to 5 even in revised list though name of Sri Ashish Srivastava appears in cause list.
2. This writ petition under Article 226 is directed against the Judgment and order dated 20.5.2011 passed by Central Administrative Tribunal, Allahabad Bench (hereinafter referred to as 'Tribunal) in Original Application No. 192 of 2008, Zafar Ahmad and others Vs. Union of India and others whereby Tribunal allowed original application.
3. The facts in brief giving rise to the present dispute are that a common selection was held in which applicants were selected and posted as Traffic Apprentice in 1981. Thereafter they were posted as Assistant Yard Master. Respondent No. 4 S.N. Singh was lower in merit in select list of Traffic Apprentice but he was posted in the cadre of Traffic Inspector. Similarly respondent no.5 Mohd. Maseeh was also lower in merit and he was also posted as Traffic Inspector. Respondent nos.4 ad 5 got promotions earlier on account of availability of vacancies in their cadres but it was belated in the case of Assistant Yard Master in which vacancies were not avaliable. Later on all the three wings were merged together and unified seniority was assigned but respondent nos. 1 to 3 were given lower seniority since respondent nos. 4 and 5 were already promoted in the Traffic Inspector due to availability of vacancies though at the time of selection they were lower in merit to respondent nos. 1 and 2.
4. The Tribunal has found that when several persons are selected in one selection and merit is seniority, if employer on their own has made posting in different cadres and due to exigency of service some persons have got promotions at an earlier point of time, they cannot retain that benefit in the matter of seniority over those who were higher in merit and subsequently all different cadres are merged together and a common seniority list is prepared, hence, the original application filed by respondents 1 to 3 were allowed and direction has been given to restore their seniority.
5. Learned counsel for petitioners despite repeated query could not point out any manifest error in the Judgment of Tribunal. We, therefore, find no merit in the writ petition. Dismissed accordingly. Interim order, if any, stands vacated.
Order Date :- 9.12.2019 Ram Murti