Back
2025 Supreme(SC) 759
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Abhay S. Oka, Ujjal Bhuyan, JJ.
Dinesh D Panchal And Ors. – Appellants
Versus
Union of India And Ors. – Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 5498 of 2012 With Civil Appeal No. 5791 of 2025 (Arising out of Special Leave Petition (C) No.15769 of 2010)
Decided On : 01-05-2025
For the Appellant(s) : Mr. Wajeeh Shafiq, AOR Mr. Vishwajeet Kumar, Adv. Ms. Sabika Ahmad, Adv. Mr. Pradhuman Gohil, Adv. Mrs. Taruna Singh Gohil, AOR Mr. Alapati Sahithya Krishna, Adv. Ms. Hetvi Ketan Patel, Adv. Mr. Rushabh N. Kapadia, Adv. Ms. Taniya Bansal, Adv.
For the Respondent(s): Mr. A. Venayagam Balan, AOR Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR Mr. Amrish Kumar, AOR Mr. Yatin Soni, Adv. Mr. Hemal Kiritkumar Sheth, AOR
Surplus railway employees are treated as fresh entrants for seniority purposes, and their placement at the bottom of the recruitment grade is valid under the Indian Railway Establishment Manual.
Headnote:(A) Indian Railway Establishment Manual, 1989 - Paragraph 313A - Seniority assignment for surplus staff - The appellants, absorbed in Ahmedabad Division, contested their seniority placement at the bottom of the recruitment grade instead of the absorption grade - Tribunal and High Court upheld the policy that surplus employees are treated as fresh entrants for seniority purposes. (Paras 12, 13, 15)
(B) Limitation - The Tribunal correctly ruled that the original application was filed within the limitation period, as the cause of action arose from the rejection of the representation on 19th April 2006. (Paras 11, 12)
Facts of the case:
The appellants were railway guards affected by the reduction of posts due to restructuring, leading to their transfer and absorption in the newly formed Ahmedabad Division. (Paras 2-5)
Findings of Court:
The Tribunal's decision to place the appellants at the bottom of the recruitment grade was affirmed, and the appeals were dismissed. (Paras 16)
Issues: The main issues included the applicability of seniority rules for surplus staff and the validity of the limitation objection raised by the respondents. (Paras 10, 11)
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the seniority of surplus employees is determined as per the Manual, treating them as fresh entrants, and the limitation objection was rightly dismissed as the application was timely filed. (Paras 12, 16)
Result: Appeals dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
ABHAY S. OKA, J.
1. Leave granted in Special Leave Petition (C) No.15769 of 2010.
FACTUAL ASPECT
2. The appellants were working in Bhavnagar Division of the Western Railway Zone. They were holding the posts d of goods guard, senior goods guard, passenger guard, senior passenger guard and mail/express guard. By the year 2002, there was a reduction of goods traffic within the territorial jurisdiction of Bhavnagar Division on account of the conversion of railway tracks from meter gauge to broad gauge. Apart from a considerable reduction in the number of goods trains running between Sabarmati and Botad, there was a cancellation of mail/express trains running between Ahmedabad and Bhavnagar as well.
3. On 17th September 2002, the Western Railway accorded sanction for the surrender of 19 posts of goods guard in Bhavnagar Division. Similarly, by a letter dated 8th January 2003, sanction was accorded for surrendering 12 permanent posts of goods guard based on a six-monthly cadre review. In view of surrender, the Division Officer of Bhavnagar Division, by a communication dated 22nd November 2002, gave an option to the employees (guards and drivers category) to opt for transfer to another division. Some of the petitioners before the High Court exercised this option. By memorandum dated 7th March 2003, the option of original petitioners Nos. 7, 8, 11, 12, 13, 14 and 15 before the High Court, and three others was accepted, and they were posted at Ahmedabad with a direction that they should be relieved to report to the place of posting. They were all goods guards. At the relevant time, Ahmedabad Division was not in existence, but Ahmedabad was falling within the territorial jurisdiction of Baroda Division. On 1st April 2003, due to restructuring, new divisions were created, and accordingly, Ahmedabad Division was formed. Those petitioners before the High Court, whose option was accepted under the memorandum dated 7th March 2003, joined at Ahmedabad Station on various dates from 9th April 2003 to 26th April 2003.
4. There was a communication issued on 30th June 2003 by the Divisional Office, Bhavnagar, addressed to the Deputy Regional Manager, Ahmedabad, requesting to give acceptance for absorbing 12 surplus guards mentioned therein on the ground of being rendered surplus. The original petitioners Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9 and 10 were named in the letter. They were either mail/express guards, senior passenger guards and passenger guards named in the letter. On 5th April 2004, the competent authority in Bhavnagar Division issued a formal office order in accordance with the approval of the competent authority for the surrender of a total of 11 posts and accorded approval for the transfer of original petitioners Nos.1 to 6, 9 and 10 before the High Court, and three others. Accordingly, on 9th April 2004, the original petitioners Nos. 1 to 6, 9 and 10 resumed duties at Ahmedabad. The surrender of 11 posts, which was approved on 5th April 2004 by Bhavnagar Division, was in respect of three mail/express guards, four posts of passenger guards, and the remaining posts of senior goods guard.
5. In the present appeals, we are dealing with two categories of appellants. The first category is of original petitioners Nos. 7, 8, 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15 before the High Court, who belonged to the goods guard category and who joined Ahmedabad station in April 2003. The second category of appellants are original petitioners Nos.1 to 6, 9, and 10 before the High Court, who belonged to the cadre of guards, such as mail/express guards, senior passenger guards, and passenger guards who were in a higher pay scale than the first category. They joined at Ahmedabad on 5th April 2004, after the formation of Ahmedabad Division. As far as the first category is concerned, they were rendered surplus in Bhavnagar Division and were absorbed in Baroda Division in Ahmedabad. After the formation of Ahmedabad Division, they were allotted to Ahmedabad Division. The rest of the
