SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

1985 Supreme(Raj) 124

Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench
S.C. Agrawal, J.
Harbans Singh - Appellant
Versus
Union of India - Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 288 of 1978
Decided On : May 22, 1985

Advocates Appeared:
B.K. Pathak, for Petitioner; G.S. Bapna, for Respondents.

Headnote:(a) Constitution of India—Art. 226-Writ Laches—Panel of 6/10-5-1976 challenged in 1978— No possible explanation—Writ not maintainable.(b) Railway Service Regulations—Regulation 5 of Chap. XII—-Selection made in contravention of Regulation — Marking system not strictly followed— Selections—Validity.(c) Railway Service Regulation—Determination of vacancies for SC/ST and the general categories—Circular dt. 15-4-1978—40 point roster—Validity.

       

S.C. AGRAWAL, J.—Harbans Singh, the petitioner in this writ petition, is employed in the Railway Protection Force (RPF). After his selection for the post of Sub Inspector Cr. II he joined for initial training on 1st April, 1965 and after completion of the training he was appointed as Sub Inspector Cr. II in the Armed Wing Branch by the order of the Chief Security Officer dated 30tb April, 1966. He was promoted as Sub-Inspector cr. I with effect from 11th March, 1974 by the order of the Chief Security Officer, Western Railway, Bombay dated 29th November, 1975. The next post higher to the post of Sub-Inspector Gr. I is that of Inspector Gr. III. The promotion to the aforesaid post is made on the basis of Seniority-cum-Suitability by a Selection Board. The Selection Board was constituted in 1975 to draw the panel of Sub-Inspector Gr. I and II who were suitable for promotion as Inspector Gr. II to fill up 17 vacancies of Inspectors Gr. III. Out of these 17 vacancies 4 were reserved for Scheduled Castes and 1 was reserved for Scheduled Tribes The Selection Board met on January 20, 30 and 31, 1976 and on the basis of the recommendations of the Selection Board, the panel of Sub-Inspectors who had been selected for promotion as Inspector Gr.II were notified by the Chief Security Officer in May, 6/10 1976. The petitioner was amongst persons who had appeared before the Selection Board but his name was not included in the said penal. On 5th April, 1978 the Chief Security Officer Western Railway, notified that it was proposed to convene the Selection Board to draw the panel of Sub-Inspectors Gr. II in the Executive Branch, Fire Service Branch and Prosecution Branch suitable for promotion as Inspectors Grade II It was also notified that in the Exceptive Branch, the selection would be convened for filling up six posts of Inspectors out of which three posts were reserved for Scheduled Castes, one post was reserved for Scheduled Tribes and two posts were vacant for general community. The lists of Sub-Inspectors who were eligible to appear for selection in the respective Branches were also circulated. In the list of Sub-Inspectors of the Executive Branch the names of 24 Sub-Inspectors were included, but the name of the petitioner was not included. The petitioner thereupon filed this writ petition. In the writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the selection made by the Selection Board which met on January 29, 30 and 31, 1976 and the panel (Annex. 5) dated May, 6/10, 1976 prepared by the said Selection Board. The petitioner has also prayed that the notification (Annex.6) dated 15th April, 1978 with regard to selection fixed on 19th May, 1978 for the post of Inspector Grade II be quashed.

2. As regards the panel (Ex. 5) dated May 6/10,1976 which was prepared by the Selection Board which met on January, 29, 30 and 31, 1976, the case of the petitioner is that the said selection was made in violation of Regulation 5 of Chapter XII of the Railway Protection Force Regulations 1966 (hereinafter referred to as the "Regulations") which prescribes the mode for assessment of the merit of the candidates for the purpose of promotion to the post of Inspector Gr. III. The case of the petitioner is further that in the said panel 25 candidates from general community, 5 candidates from Scheduled Castes, and 2 candidates from Scheduled Tribes have been selected which is in excess of the total number of vacancies that were notified. The petitioner has submitted that by the selection of 33 candidates i.e. 16 candidates in excess of notified vacancies, the petitioner was deprived of his future chances of selection.

3. With regard to the selection which was notified by notification dated 15th April, 1978, the case of the petitioner is that the sanctioned strength of the posts of Inspectors Gr. II and Inspectors Gr. Ill after the merger of the two cadres of Inspector Gr. II and III was 68 and that 10 persons belonging to Scheduled Castes were already working as Ins












































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top