ORDER

Leave granted. We have heard learned counsel on both sides.

2. This appeal, by special leave, arises from the order dated 18.12.1996 by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Allahabad Bench in O.A. No. 1024/95.

3. The appellants were initially drafted on the diesel side of the locomotive operations. Subsequently, on introduction of electrical engines they were given training and were absorbed on the electrical locomotive side. The question of i seniority of employees already working on the electrical locomotive side and those shifted from the diesel locomotive side to the electrical locomotive side had arisen. The Tribunal has held that since they were deployed to the electrical side for the first time, their seniority was required to be adjudged from the date of their deployment in the electrical locomotive operations and the previous service cannot be counted for the purpose of determination of inter se seniority. This controversy was considered by this Court in Rama Kant Chaturvedi v. Divisional Supdt., Northern Railway1 wherein this Court had held as under :

"The Diesel Unit of the Railways was constituted for the first time apart from the Steam Unit already existing. The two units were treated as separate and distinct having different avenues of promotion. As considerable time might elapse before Diesel Cleaners could be promoted as Shunters and Drivers Assistant in the diesel unit it was decided to draft Firemen on the steam side, possessing the minimum educational qualification of matriculation, to the diesel side as Drivers Assistants after giving them the requisite training. That was done. All the initial appointments were on officiating basis. As a result of the appointments, some Firemen Grade C (the appellants), who were of lower category than Firemen Grade B and Firemen Grade A but who happened to possess the minimum educational qualification which many of the Firemen Grade A and B did not possess, were drawn into the diesel unit earlier than some of the Firemen Grades A and B who came in later as a result of the relaxation of the rule prescribing minimum educational qualification. The Railway Administration issued instructions that the juniormost Firemen Grade C officiating as Diesel Driver Assistant should be reverted in order to accommodate the senior staff. Pursuant to these instructions the appellants, all of whom were drawn from the category of Firemen Grade C and who had been appointed as officiating Drivers Assistants, were reverted to the steam side as Firemen Grade C in order to make way for Firemen Grades A and B who were appointed as Drivers Assistants on the diesel side long after the appointment of the appellants as Drivers Assistants on the diesel side. Questions for determination were whether the earlier appointees could claim seniority over the later appointees and whether the Railway Administration was justified in reverting the appellants to the old unit. Allowing the appeals the Supreme Court.

Held :

Those who were drafted into the diesel unit earlier would not lose the benefit of their continuous service on the diesel unit merely because the appointments were on an officiating basis and because others who were senior to them on the steam side came in or chose to come in at a later stage. If seniors on the steam side did not come in earlier it was because they were barred from coming in by the requirement of a minimum educational qualification. The subsequent relaxation of the rule cannot enable them to take a frog leap over the heads of those who had come into the diesel side earlier. The seniority on the steam side is of no relevance in determining seniority on the diesel side when they are appointed on the diesel side on different days."

4. The ratio therein was followed by another Bench of this Court in South Eastern Railway through Chief Personnel Officer & Ors. v. Ramanarain Singh & Ors. etc.2.

5. Shri Vijay Bahuguna, learned senior counsel appearing for the ap