Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

The applicants are Assistant Station Masters with their lien in the Palaghat Division of Southern Railway. When the Salem Division was formed on 1.11.2007 they were deemed to have automatically been transferred to the Salem Division as they were working in the territorial jurisdiction of the proposed Salem Division. Their request for a transfer to different stations registered in the Divisional Office Palaghat prior to formation of the Salem Division were treated as options to be transferred to the Palaghat Division by the official respondents. Having understood that transfers to Palaghat Division would take a long time and the impact it will have on the career of the applicants they had submitted representations for cancelling their registrations to the different stations falling within the territorial jurisdiction of the Palaghat Division. Though a number of representations were made thereafter no action has been taken by the fourth respondent to transfer the applicants' lien to Salem Division and to ensure grant of consequential benefits as if the applicants had continued in the Salem Division of Southern Railway. Failure on the part of the respondents results in substantial prejudice and irreparable injury as a number of applicants' juniors have been promoted as Station Masters Grade-III. There is also less likelihood of applicants being promoted as Traffic Apprentice against the vacancies falling within the territorial jurisdiction of Salem  Division. Aggrieved the applicants have filed this Original Application for the following reliefs:-

2. On the date of hearing the counsel for the applicants submitted that he is pressing the case of applicant No. 2 only. Therefore, only the case of second applicant is considered in this OA.

3. As per interim order dated 26.3.2010 the second applicant was allowed to appear in the written test for promotion to the post of Traffic Apprentice in the Salem Division.

4. It is submitted by the applicant that he has not opted for transfer for Palaghat Division nor were there any such willingness called for. In so far as his request has not been acted upon by transferring him to Palaghat Division, he has every right to withdraw his request for transfer to different stations in the Palaghat Division. In fact he had withdrawn his request for  transfer to any stations in Palaghat Division. In such circumstances the respondents ought to have treated him as if he had continued in Salem Division from the date of its inception and the respondents ought to have transferred his lien from the Palaghat Division to the Salem Division. Non- feasance on the part of the respondents to act upon the request of withdrawal is arbitrary, discriminatory, contrary to law and unconstitutional.

6. In the rejoinder it was submitted by the applicant that his lien is maintained at Palaghat Division and the case of the applicant falls within the jurisdiction of this Tribunal. He is borne in the cadre and seniority list of Palaghat Division. Annexure A-2 is the representation dated 24.6.2008 submitted by the applicant. He had represented to the respondents before the cut of date of 30.7.2008 as early as 24.1.2008. The applicant never represented for a transfer in terms of Annexure A-1 procedure orders dated 19.11.2007. No option was called for from the applicants either to be retained in the Salem Division or to be transferred to the Palaghat Division. The respondents ought to have cancelled the applicant's deemed lien in Palaghat Division and deemed the applicant to continue in the Salem Division itself by transferring the lien from the Palaghat Division. The respondents have taken no action to settle the issue of the applicant who remains in uncertainty without good prospects. It is up to the official respondents alone to assign seniority of the applicant. The applicant does  not need to implead others working in the Salem Division. The applicant has never been transferred to the Palaghat Division and is still functioning at the Salem Division, but for the lien of the applicant maintained at the Palaghat Division he would have been considered for the post of Traffic Apprentice. It is incorrect to say that the applicant has not represented about the cancellation of registration before 31.5.2008. Annexure A-2 and similar representations disprove the same. Annexure R-1 is dated 17.7.2008. Annexure A-2 was submitted by the applicant much before the above date and was followed by further representations.

13. The applicant continues to be in an unsettled position even after more than 3 years have passed since the formation of the Salem Division on 1.11.2007. It is necessary to settle his case to end the uncertainty. His  juniors have been promoted although on ad hoc basis in the Salem Division but for his lien at the Palaghat Division he could have been considered for the post of Traffic Apprentice. Allowing the applicant to continue in the Salem Division maintaining his seniority does not unsettle the settled position of seniority in the Salem Division. In the provisional seniority list of Assistant Station Masters as on 5.5.2010 in Salem Division the position of the applicant is as under:-