Kerala High Court
Union Of India vs Prajaj C
Author: Manjula Chellur
Bench: Manjula Chellur, K.Vinod Chandran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. MANJULA CHELLUR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF JANUARY 2013/19TH POUSHA 1934
OP (CAT).No. 2551 of 2012 (Z)
-----------------------------
AGAINST THE ORDER IN OA.1107/2010 of CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,
ERNAKULAM BENCH
................
PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3 IN THE OA:
-----------------------------------------------------
1. UNION OF INDIA
REPRESENTED BY THE GENERAL MANAGER
SOUTHERN RAILWAY, HEADQUARTERS OFFICE
CHENNAI - 600 003.
2. CHIEF PERSONNEL OFFICER
SOUTHERN RAILWAY, HEADQURTERS OFFICE, PARK TOWN P.O
CHENNAI - 600 003.
3. DIVISIONAL PERSONNEL OFFICER
SOUTHERN RAILWAY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DIVISION
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 014.
BY ADV. SRI.V.K.MOHAMMED YOUSUF
RESPONDENT/APPLICANT IN THE O.A.:
-------------------------------------------
PRAJAJ C.
S/O.LATE K.CHANDRA BHANU, TECHNICIAN (C&W)-II,
CARRIAGE & WAGON, COACHING DEPOT
SOUTHERN RAILWAY, TRIVANDRUM CENTRAL, TRIVANDRUM
RESIDING AT "OM SAKTHI", KUREEPUZHA WEST,
KAVANADU POST, KOLLAM - 691 003.
BY ADV. SRI.T.C.GOVINDA SWAMY
SRI.G.SHYAM RAJ
THIS OP (CAT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09-01-2013, THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
OP (CAT).No. 2551 of 2012 (Z)
APPENDIX
PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS :
EXHIBIT P1. TRUE COPY OF THE OA NO.1107/2010 FILED BEFORE THE CENTRAL
ADMIINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL.
ANNEXURE A4.TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.V/P/268/IV/C&W/GR./C/VOL.IV
DATED 06.09.2005 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
ANNEXURE A1.TRUE COPY OF THE RULE 159 OF THE INDIAN RAILWAY
ESTABLISHMENT MANUAL VOL.1.
ANNEXURE A2.TRUE COPY OF THE RAILWAY BOARD ORDER BEARING RBE
NO.17/2000 DATED 28.1.2000.
ANNEXURE A3.A TRUE COPY OF LETTER BEARING NO.V/M226/XIV/C&W DATED
13.4.2005 ISUED BY THE SR.DME/TVC.
ANNEXURE A5.A TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 1.4.2008 ADDRESSED
TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
ANNEXURE A6.A TRUE COPY OF RAILWAY BOARD BEARING NO.RBE NO.152/01
DATED 3.8.2001.
ANNEXURE A7.A TRUE COPY OF REMINDER DATED 18.6.08 ADDRESSED TO
THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
ANNEXURE A8.A TRUE COPY OF LETTER RECEIVED FROM THE RRB, SECUNDERABAD
UNDER NO.RRB/SC/RTI ACT/2008/23 DATED 10.9.1980.
ANNEXURE A9. A TRUE COPY OF INDENT PLACED BY THE EAST COAST RAILWAY FOR
RECRUITMENT TO THE POST OF TECHNICIAN (C&W) BEFORE THE
RRB, SECUNDERABAD DATED 26.12.2007.
ANNEXURE A10.A TRUE COPY OF NOTIFICATION ISSUED BY THE RRB,
SECUNDERABAD UNDER ADVERTISEMENT FOR EMPLOYMENT
NOTICE NO.1/2008 DATED 1/6/2008.
ANNEXURE A11.A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 3.11.2008
ADDRESSED TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
ANNEXURE A12.A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 14TH JANUARY 2010 IN
OA NO.154/2009 RENDERED BY THIS HONOURABLE TRIBUNAL.
EXHIBIT P2. TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY STATEMENT IN OA NO.1107/2010 FILED
BEFORE THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,
ERNAKULAM BENCH.
ANNEXURE R1.TRUE COPY OF THE RAILWAY BOARDS LETTER NO.E(NG)
111/2000/RC-1/GEN/16/JCM/DC DATED 19.6.2000.
OP (CAT).No. 2551 of 2012 (Z)
EXHIBIT P3. TRUE COPY OF REJOINDER IN OA 1107/2010 FILED BEFORE THE
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL ERNAKULAM BENCH.
ANNEXURE A13.TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN OA 329 OF 2010 DATED 4.11.2010.
EXHIBIT P4. TRUE COPY OF THE ADDITIONAL REPLY STATEMENT IN
OA NO. 1107/2010 FILED BEFORE THE CENTRAL ADMIINISTRATIVE
TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM BENCH.
ANNEXURE R2.TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.V/P/268/IV/C&W/GR.C/VOL/
DATED 8.11.2011.
EXHIBIT P5. TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE CENTRAL ADMIINISTRATIVE
TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM BENCH DATED 23RD FEBRUARY 2010
IN OA NO 1107/2010.
/TRUE COPY/
PA TO JUDGE
Manjula Chellur, C.J. & K. Vinod Chandran, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
O.P.(CAT) No. 2551 OF 2012
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 9th day of January, 2013
JUDGMENT
Manjula Chellur, C.J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners.
2. It is not in dispute that the respondent herein came to be appointed in Thiruvananthapuram Division of Southern Railways on compassionate ground in Group D post and later he was offered Group C post of Technician Grade III (Carriage & Wagon for short "C & W'). It is not in dispute that he has completed training period of three years and later came with an application that he being a holder of ITI needs to undergo only six months training instead of three years training. Therefore, he is eligible to be exempted from three years training and the Department has to consider that he has been absorbed against the post he was working on and with effect from 06.12.2003 with all consequential benefits arising therefrom.
3. The main contention of the petitioners department before the Tribunal was, a vast difference exists between the direct recruitees and the persons who are OP(CAT) No. 2551 of 2012 -:2:- appointed on compassionate ground, because of the very procedural exercise which has to be undergone by the direct recruitees, which is not undergone by the Compassionate ground appointees. The other ground raised by them was, unless ITI in specific trade is undertaken, they cannot be treated as ITI holder for a particular work.
4. In the present case, on earlier occasion there was an advertisement, notice No.1 of 2008, inviting application for various posts including Technician Grade III (C & W). The required educational qualification was course completed Act Apprentice/ITI in Fitter/Welder/Electrician trades. Apparently, the applicant/respondent herein also is in C & W as Technician Grade III. He is also an ITI (Electrician) holder. He has also completed 3 years of training. If the arguments of learned counsel for the petitioners were to be considered that direct recruitees have better training than the compassionate ground appointees, the purpose for which such difference was created does not exist any more for the simple reason that respondent has already undergone three years training. Therefore, so far as OP(CAT) No. 2551 of 2012 -:3:- standard of work or quality of work that can be done by a compassionate appointee, it cannot be less than the work that would be done by the direct recruitee.
4. Then coming to the specific trade, when Technician Grade III (C & W) could take fitter, Welder and Electrician, in the absence of placing any material on record that the respondent was directed only to work in the mechanical side, we are unable to understand how the specific trade or particular trade would come in the way of the appointment of the respondent.
In that view of the matter, we are of the opinion, when the qualifications for compassionate appointment also is ITI with six months training, we find no ground to interfere with the opinion of the Tribunal and accordingly the Original Petition is dismissed.
Manjula Chellur, Chief Justice.
K. Vinod Chandran, Judge.
ttb/09/01 OP(CAT) No. 2551 of 2012 -:4:-