Madan U. Lokur, J.

( 1 )

( 2 ) THE Appellants are working as Fire Foreman (Regular) with the Airport Authority of India (for short AAI) in Safdarjung Aerodrome, New Delhi.

ACCORDING to the Appellants, AAI had formulated a "transfer Policy" in May 1994, which policy was issued in consultation with its recognized unions and associations. In terms of the said Policy, a seniority/priority list of officers liable for transfer was prepared. This list was operated upto and including the 1997 "transfer season". According to the Appellants, the list showed some discrepancies with regard to their seniority/priority. Consequently, they sent representations dated 24th April, 1998 and 18th May, 1998 pointing out the discrepancies and also suggesting that transfers in the 1998 "transfer season" be made accordingly.

( 3 ) THE Appellants submit that their representations were not heeded and an order dated 5th June, 1998 was issued transferring them to Varanasi from New Delhi. This transfer order dated 5th June, 1998 was challenged by the Appellants by filing CW. No. 2950/98. It was contended that the transfer order was in violation of the "transfer Policy" and as such was liable to be set aside.

AFTER hearing both the parties, a learned Single Judge of this Court was pleased to dismiss the writ petition by the impugned order dated 12th April, 1999. This appeal under Clause X of the Letters Patent is directed against the order dated 12th April, 1999.

DURING the course of hearing, no reference was made to any specific provision of the "transfer Policy" which was alleged to have been violated. Learned counsel for the Appellants, however, vehemently submitted that as per the seniority/priority list, the Appellants were not due for transfer inasmuch persons senior to them in the said list had not been transferred. Specific refer ence was ma to six Fire Foreman, namely, S/shri S. S. Dhankad, Pitamber Dull, Rajinder Singh, K. S. Rathi, Shyam Lal and Suresh Kumar. Reference was also made, in passing, to S/shri Chander Prakash and Bhanwar Singh but no serious submissions were made in their regard.

AAI had formulated a Flexible Complementing Scheme (for short, FCS ) sometime in May 1995. The object of this Scheme was "to evolve a system to give relief to the staff who have been waiting for promotion for long years after completing the eligibility period, for want of vacant posts in the higher grade. "

( 4 ) IT was under this Scheme that the six officers mentioned above were granted promotion from the post of Fire and Rescue Operators (for short FARO) to the post of Fire Foreman (FCS ).

IT is submitted by the AAI that the nature and duties of Fire Foreman (FCS) and Fire Foreman (Regular) are different. It is stated in the affidavit of Shri Shambu Prasad, dated 18th August, 1998, as follows:

"the promotion from the Fire and Rescue Operators to Fire Foreman (F. C. S.) is made pursuant to promotion by D. P. C. , pursuant to promotion of Fire and Rescue Operators to Fire Foreman (F. C. S.), the posts of Fire and Rescue Operators are not Filled unless the Fire Foreman (F. C. S.) are promoted to Fire Foreman (Regular), pursuant to promotion by a D. P. C. For promotion of Fire Foreman to Senior Fire Foreman, the Fire Foreman (F. C. S.) are not considered so long as they are not promoted as Fire Foremen (Regular ). The duties of Fire Foreman (Regular) and Fire Foreman (F. C. S.) arc also different. The Fire Foreman (Regular) is a shift supervisor and Fire Foreman (F. C. S.) performs the duties of Fire and Rescue Operator under him. Similarly in a crash Fire tender, the supervisor is a Fire Foreman (Regular) and Fire Foreman (F. C. S.) performs duties under him as Fire and Rescue Operator. Pursuant to representations made to respondents, it was clarified that Fire Foremen who are promoted under Flexible Complimenting Scheme shall continue to function in their present capacities so as long as operational requirement of critical manning level is not fulfilled. "

WITH

Click Here to Read the rest of this document