Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

(PER HON'BLE SHRI PRASANNA KUMAR PRADHAN, MEMBER (ADMN) Applicant has filed the present OA seeking the following relief:

i. Quash and set aside the impugned memorandum in No.H/P.612/III/SCOR/YMS/Vol.II dated 7.4.2002 (Annexure-A8) so far it relates to the applicant; letter in No.H/P.612/III/SCOR/Vol.III dated 10.11.2006(Annexure-A11) and letter in No.H/P.179/III/Guards/RTI/Vol.II dated 4.1.2012 (Annexure-A27) enclosing a copy of letter in No.H/P.612/III/SCOR/Vol.4 dated 2.1.2012, issued by the 1st respondents, as arbitrary, discriminatory and void for the reasons stated in the application, while directing the respondents to extend similar and equal treatment on par with others, who are similarly situate, who belongs to different batches of Traffic Apprentice Training, so as to remove disparity and anomaly not only in the matter of pay and allowances but also in the matter of seniority. ii. Direct the respondents to draw all consequential benefits.

2. From the submissions made in the OA and reply statement, the facts of the case emerge as follows:

The applicant was selected for the post of Traffic Apprentice having qualified in the written examination/interview conducted by the Railway Recruitment Board and was recommended to South Central Railway vide letter dated 5.7.1985. Thereafter, he was deployed for training as Traffic Apprentice w.e.f.
16.9.1986(Annexure-A1) in Batch No.C-10 and completed the training for 3 years and he passed final assessment examination held on 16.9.1989(Annexure-A2) and was given independent duty charge of Section Controller from 26.9.1989 as evident from the communication at Annexure-A3.
3) In order to maintain uniformity, it has been decided that the results of the training should be deemed to have been announced of the last date of examination held after training irrespective of the date of announcement of the results and that those who pass in the examination should be assigned seniority in working posts from the dates following the last date of the examination.

9. The Circulars placed at Annexures-R1&R2 and filed along with reply statement also pertains to regulation of the period between the date of expiry of the period of apprenticeship and the date of posting and it has been reiterated that apprentices should be absorbed against working posts on the working day following the date of completion of the apprenticeship/training OA.No.925/2014/CAT/Bangalore Bench period. The communication dtd.15.5.1987(RBE No.119/87) relates to recruitment of traffic/commercial apprentices and spell out the modalities of recruitment, qualification, reduction of apprenticeship training period from 3 to 2 years and other matters but there is no reference to circular SC No.7/76 or assignment of seniority as stipulated therein. Therefore we fail to understand the reasoning given by the respondents in their communication of 4.1.2012 by making reference to letter of 15.5.1987. Therefore no cogent explanation has been provided as to under what circumstances the date of appointment/pay already fixed in respect of the applicant from 17.9.1989 i.e. the date following the last date of examination where he passed to 1.6.1990 was done. When the circular SC.No.7/76 provide for consideration of date of appointment as the date following the last date of examination, the question of date of absorption as Section Controller does not have any relevance. Accordingly, Annexure-A8 order and communication dtd.4.1.2012(Annexure-A27) seems to be unjustified. However, the respondents have clearly indicated that his juniors' pay has been revised and they have been getting lesser pay than the applicant. Moreover his seniority has not been affected. Therefore there is no clarity as to the actual benefit that will accrue to the applicant if the date of appointment as Section Controller is pre-dated to 17.9.1989 in place of 1.6.1990. This has to be spelt out by the applicant to the respondents in detail.