Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

1. This application has been filed by the applicants seeking for the following relief:

To call for the records pertaining to the Senior Divisional Personnel Officer, letter No. B/P608/VI/1/Tfc. APP/LDCE dated 24.09.2005 containing the list of eligible and ineligible candidates and the impugned memorandum No. B/P. 608/VI/1/Tfc. APP/LDCE dated 28.08.2006 issued by the Senior Divisional Personnel Officer, South Central Railway, Vijayawada and declare that the action of respondents in considering the private respondents names from 4 to 8 as eligible to appear for the selection of Traffic apprentice as illegal and arbitrary and set aside the Memorandum No. B/P.608/VI/1/Tfc. APP/LDCE dated 28.08.2006 to the extent of the private respondents 4 to 8 by declaring that the same as arbitrary illegal and violative of Constitutional provisions and consequently direct the respondents to prepare the select list of the eligible candidates in accordance with merit by including the names of the applicants in the panel.

2. The undisputed facts of the case are that in order to form a panel by holding selection to the post of Traffic Apprentice in scale of Rs. 5500-9000 against 10% Limited Departmental Competitive Examination (in short LDCE) of BZA division, the 3rd respondent has issued a notification vide letter No. B/P.608/VI/1/Tfc.App/LDCE dated 25.07.2005 inviting applications from the eligible group 'c' employees of Operating department (other than Ministerial cadres) who are graduates and not over 40 years of age in the case of UR employees and 45 years in the case of SC/ST employees, as on 1.7.2005.

4. In para-5 of the said notification it was made clear that the employees selected as Traffic Apprentices are required to undergo training as Traffic apprentice, Aptitude test as per rules in vogue. The 3rd respondent vide letter No. B/P.608/VI/1/Tfc.APP/LDCE dated 24.09.2005 issued the list of 97 eligible employees to appear for the written examination which is enclosed as Annexure A-2 at page 15-18 of the OA. At page 18 of the OA there is a list of 4 ineligible employees and the list is marked as Annexure-II to the letter dated 24.09.2005 (supra). The employee at sr. No. 4 is declared ineligible for the reason that he is already working in the post of Dy.SS in 5500-9000 Grade. The applicants are at Sr. No. 38 and 39 of the list of eligible employees (page 17) whereas the private respondents are at sr. No. 86 to 90 of the said list. The 3rd respondent vide its letter No. B/P.608/VI/1/Tfc.APP/LDCE dated 21.12.2005, declared 50 employees qualified in the written examination conducted on 03.12.05 in connection with the selection for the post of Traffic Apprentice in scale of Rs. 5500-9000 RS(RP) against 10% quota, which is enclosed as Annexure A-4 at page 20 of the OA. The applicants are at Sr. No. 18 and 19 whereas the private respondents are at sr. No. 45 to 49 of the said list. It is the case of the applicants that when the applicants qualified in the written examination and found place in the list of selected employees at sr. No. 17 and 18, and are senior to the private respondents, a memorandum No. B/P.608/VI/1/ Tfc.App/LDCE dated 28.08.2006 was issued by 3rd respondent declaring a panel of 19 employees who were found suitable for promotion to the post of Traffic Apprentice in the scale of pay of Rs. 5500-9000 and the same is enclosed at page 22 of the OA as Annexure A-5 without including the name of the applicants herein.

8. Respondents have contested the application by filing a counter reply. Respondents have admittedly stated that a positive act of selection was initiated vide notification dated 25.07.2005 calling eligible volunteers from Operating department fulfilling the conditions stipulated therein to fill up 20 (UR-11, SC-03 & ST 02) vacancies of Traffic Apprentices in scale Rs. 5500-9000 (stipendiary scale Rs. 5000-5150) against 10% LDCE and that out of 102 volunteers, 98 were found eligible to be called for the written examination. It is the contention of the respondents that of the above said eligible volunteers, 86 were from non-running cadre of Assistant Station Master & Trains Clerk and 12 were from Traffic Running Goods Guard cadre. Out of the remaining 04 volunteers, 03 were found ineligible due to age factor as on 01.07.2005 and the remaining 01 employee was found ineligible since he had already been working on regular basis as Deputy Station Superintendent in scale Rs. 5500-9000. A written examination was conducted on 03.12.2005 and 50 employees i.e. 44 from non-running cadre and 06 from traffic running cadre have qualified in the written examination and the results were published vide proceedings dated 21.12.2005. They were subjected to final assessment on "General Post" selection basis. On 28.08.2006, a select panel comprising of 19 employees (UR-15, SC-03, ST-01) in the order of inter-se seniority from amongst those secured 60% marks in professional ability and 60% marks in the aggregate was drawn in terms of Para-219(j) of Indian Railway Establishment Manual, Vol.I, 1989. Against the remaining 01 ST vacancy, no ST employee qualified to be placed on the select panel. It is, therefore, the case of the respondents that in terms of provisions contained in para 219(g&i) of Indian Railway Establishment Manual, the procedure for conducting the selections including the drawing up of the final panel, for filling up "General Selection" posts i.e. those outside the normal channel of promotion for which the eligible staff of different categories/Departments are called, is the same as that applicable to the selections held for filling-up the "Selection" posts in normal channel of promotion as laid down in sub-para 219(g,h & j) of the Manual. It is also fairly submitted by the respondents that, however, the above procedure for filling-up general selection posts has been reviewed pursuant to Hon'ble Supreme Court order and judgment dated 12.03.1996 in M. Ram Jayaram v. General Manager, South Central Railway and Ors. 1996 (1) SC SLJ 536 holding inter-alia that in the impugned selection for appointment to the post of Law Assistant it is illegal to award marks for seniority. The Ministry of Railways have accordingly decided to modify the existing procedure vide Clause (I & iii) of Para 219(j) of the Manual for filling up General Selection posts for which staff of different categories/ departments fulfilling the conditions are eligible to volunteer, as follows: