Back
2025 Supreme(Ker) 612
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
AMIT RAWAL, K.V. JAYAKUMAR, JJ.
Union Of India, Represented By The General Manager, Southern Railway and Ors. – Petitioners
Versus
K. Retheesh, S/o. K. Mohandas and Ors. – Respondents
OP (CAT) No. 254 Of 2019
Decided On : 05-03-2025
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : BY ADVS. SMT.SUMATHY DANDAPANI (SR.) SREEJITH P. R SMT.ASHA CHERIAN, SC, RAILWAYS
For the Respondent: BY ADVS. SRI.T.C.GOVINDASWAMY SMT.KALA T.GOPI
IMPORTANT POINT
Inter-divisional transfers must be prioritized over direct recruitment for railway employees, as per Tribunal orders.
Headnote:
(A) Indian Railway Establishment Manual - Paragraph 312 - Transfer and seniority of railway employees - Applicants, working as Assistant Loco Pilots, sought transfer and seniority in preference to direct recruits, which was upheld by the Central Administrative Tribunal - Tribunal emphasized that inter-divisional transfers must be prioritized before direct recruitment. (Paras 2 , 6 , 10 )
(B) Legal compliance - The Tribunal found that the respondents disregarded its previous orders, which mandated that applicants be considered for transfer and seniority before direct recruits. (Paras 6 , 10 )
Facts of the case:
The applicants, 64 Assistant Loco Pilots, requested inter-divisional transfers from Salem to Palakkad division, claiming seniority based on prior Tribunal orders.
Findings of Court:
The Tribunal's order was upheld, affirming the applicants' entitlement to transfer and seniority over direct recruits.
Issues: The main issues included the legality of the respondents' actions in determining seniority and compliance with Tribunal orders.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the Tribunal's order must be followed, emphasizing the priority of inter-divisional transfers over direct recruitment.
Result: OP(CAT) dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
(K. V. JAYAKUMAR, J.)
Feeling aggrieved by the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal in O.A.No.355/2014, Ernakulam Bench dated 11.12.2018, Union of India and its officers preferred this OP(CAT).
2. The applicants (64 in numbers), who are working as Assistant Loco Pilots (ALPs) in Southern Railway, knocked the doors of the Central Administrative Tribunal claiming transfer and seniority in preference to the party respondents. All the applicants submitted their request for inter-divisional transfer from Salem division to Palakkad division and their names were registered for Palakkad division.
3. As per the orders of the Railway Board, a person requesting for inter-divisional transfer is to be appointed against the vacancies in the direct recruitment quota and be given preference over such recruitment. When the department attempted to appoint number of direct recruits through General Departmental Competitive Examination, the applicants instituted O.A.No.772/2011 before the Tribunal. The Tribunal, as per order dated 17.02.2012, directed that inter divisional transfers are to be effected before the appointment of the direct recruits.
4. The main grievance of the respondents/applicants was that the petitioners have determined the seniority of the direct recruits, without considering the orders passed by the Tribunal in OA No.902/2010 and connected cases. The respondents/applicants claimed seniority as per the orders passed by the Tribunal in the aforementioned OA. The respondents/applicants have laid the following claims before the Central Administrative Tribunal.
“(i) Call for the records leading to the issue of Annexure Al and Annexure Al(a) quash the same;
(ii) Declare that the applicants are entitled to be transferred and appointed against DR quota vacancies in the Palakkad Division of Southern Railway in preference to those who are included in A5, A6 and A7 as declared in A3 and A4 which have become final and conclusive, and direct the respondents accordingly;
(iii) Direct the respondents to assign the applicants seniority in preference to those who are included in A5, A6 and A7 in the matter of absorption against DR quota vacancies of ALPs in the Palakkad Division of Southern Railway and direct the respondents to grant all the consequential benefits arising there from;
(iv) Award costs of and incidental to this application;
(v) Pass such other orders or directions as deemed just, fit and necessary in the facts and circumstances of the case."
5. The contention of the petitioners/Union of India and its officers was that the seniority of railway employees are covered by paragraph 312 of Indian Railway Establishment Manual (IREM), Volume I. As per the said Manual, seniority of railway servants transferred at their own request from railway to another should be assigned below that of the existing/confirmed temporary and official railway servants in the relevant grades in the new establishment, irrespective of the date of confirmation or length of officiating or temporary service of the transferred railway servant.
6. Noticing the rival contentions of the counsel for the parties, the Central Administrative Tribunal allowed the original application holding that the applicants are entitled to be transferred against direct recruitment quota vacancies in Palakkad division of Southern railway in preference to those who are included in Annexures-A5, A6 and A7 and to assign them seniority in preference to the party respondents.
7. The learned counsel for the respondents/applicants supported the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal. On the other hand, Adv.Asha Cherian, Standing Counsel for Railways submitted that the impugned order is legally unsustainable.
8. We have heard the rival submissions of the counsel for the parties and appraised the paper book.
9. The learned counsel for the Railways submitted that the attempt of the applicants/respondents is to agitate the issue highlighted in Ext.P1, common order in an earlier O.A. 772
