Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

5. Having considered the matter, in our view, the Tribunal failed inherently in so deciding. Paragraph 203.5 clearly predicates the normal situation, a general situation of comparing seniority based on length of service. But, so far as the employee in the present case is concerned, as noted above, he is not in normal case, for he has himself sought inter-Zonal transfer, forfeiting his seniority. He becomes the junior most in the Danapur Division where he comes on his own request. This would become meaningless if we were to apply general rule as contained in Para 203.5. That can never be the intention. Once we have the special rule in case of transfer on request which reduces Patna High Court CWJC No.24909 of 2013 dt.07-12-2015 5 or changes the seniority, then we have the general rule in shape of para 302.5 which determines the seniority. In our view, due credence has to be given to the special rule over the general rule. The seniority of the employee in the present case would be determined from the date of his entry into the cadre at the Danapur Division and not from the date of joining in the Railway Service at South Eastern Railway. This is limited to determining the inter se seniority, limited to Danapur Division and only for that purpose. Taking any other view would lead to anomalous results. For example, if upon his own request a person comes from another Zone, he becomes junior most in the cadre in the Division but if we were to apply only para 203.5 then though his seniority in the Divisional Cadre may not be permitted to take promotional examination, he being junior would qualify for promotional examination, even though he is the junior most in the cadre. This is the result which we cannot permit.