Back
High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. SATHASIVAM & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AR. RAMALINGAM
N.Kamaiyaswamy - Appellant
Versus
Central Administrative Tribunal, Chennai Bench & Others - Respondents
W.P.No.13721 of 2001
Decided On : 27 July 2005
Promotion - Reversion - Ad Hoc Basis - Southern Railway Act, 1962, Konkan Railway Corporation Act, 1988 - The court discussed the ad hoc promotions of the petitioner and the implications of his deputation to Konkan Railway Corporation. It highlighted the maintenance of lien in the parent department and the lack of regularisation of ad hoc promotions in the cadre post. The court emphasized that the ad hoc promotions obtained in an ex-cadre post would not improve the petitioner's position in the original cadre post, and there was no provision to regularise services in the ex-cadre post.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, an employee of Southern Railway, was reverted to the position of Gangmate after serving in various ad hoc promotions and a deputation to Konkan Railway Corporation. The Railway Administration cited the petitioner's retention of lien in the parent department and the lack of regularisation of ad hoc promotions as reasons for the reversion.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner's ad hoc promotions and deputation did not entitle him to claim a higher position upon his return to the parent department. It agreed with the conclusion of the Tribunal and dismissed the writ petition.
Issues: The issues revolved around the petitioner's ad hoc promotions, deputation to Konkan Railway Corporation, reversion to the position of Gangmate, and the implications of maintaining lien in the parent department.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the ad hoc promotions obtained in an ex-cadre post would not improve the petitioner's position in the original cadre post, and there was no provision to regularise services in the ex-cadre post. It emphasized the lack of regularisation of ad hoc promotions and the petitioner's awareness of the consequences of deputation.
Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed, and no costs were awarded.
P.Sathasivam, J.
Aggrieved by the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Madras Bench dated 23.07.2001 made in O.A.No.1477 of 2000, confirming the order reverting him as Gangmate, the applicant has filed above writ petition.
2. The case of the petitioner/applicant is briefly stated hereunder:
(a) According to the petitioner, he joined the service of Southern Railway in the year 1962 in Madurai Division. On 23.05.1968, he was appointed in regular service as Gangman in Madurai Division. On 23.05.1969, he was confirmed as Gangman. Thereafter, he was promoted as Motor Trolley Fitter, which post is equivalent to that of Gangmate with effect from 14.03.1973. On 13.03.1973, he was transferred to the construction wing. From 14.03.1973 to 15.07.1974, he had performed the work of Motor Trolley Fitter. In the construction wing, on 15.07.1974, he was promoted as Permanent Way Maistry. On 01.03.1980, he was promoted as Permanent Way Inspector Gr.III. On 17.05.1990, he was promoted as Permanent Way Inspector Grade II. Thereafter, on 23.04.1992, he was deputed to Konkan Railway Corporation Ltd., where his services were utilised as Permanent Way Inspector Grade I from 20.06.1995 onwards.
(b) All his promotions from the post of Motor Trolley Fitter onwards were made on ad hoc basis and from 1974 onwards, he was continuously officiating in the said posts. When he was working in the Konkan Railway Corporation, he was awarded 12 certificates for his meritorious and exemplary service and also awarded two silver medals. On 01.04.1999, he was repatriated back to Southern Railway and thereafter, posted in Madurai Division as Supervisor/Works in the scale of Rs.4500-7000 by Office Order dated 16.04.1999. On 26.07.1999, the petitioner made a representation to the Chief Personnel Officer, seeking pay protection. Thereafter, he was issued with an Office Order dated 05.11.1999 by the 4th respondent herein, reverting him as Gangmate in the scale of Rs.3050-4590 stating that he was being posted as per seniority in his substantive post.
(c) On 15.11.1999, the petitioner made a representation to the third respondent as against his reversion, to which there was no response; hence, he filed O.A.1238 of 1999 before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Madras Bench, in which the Tribunal directed the third respondent to dispose of the representation of the applicant. Pursuant to the direction of the Tribunal dated 13.09.2000 made in O.A.No.1238 of 1999, the third respondent issued an order confirming the said order of reversion dated 05.11.1999. Challenging the said order, the petitioner filed O.A.No.1477 of 2000, which was dismissed by the Tribunal. Aggrieved by the order of the Tribunal, the applicant/petitioner filed the writ petition.
3. The Railway Administration has filed a counter affidavit wherein it is stated that promotions of the petitioner as Permanent Way Inspector Grade III, Grade II and Grade I were all on ad hoc basis and the writ petitioner still retained lien in the parent Department at Permanent Way Section, Palani and his seniority remained protected. From 1992 to 31.03.1999, he was worked as Permanent Way Inspector Grade-I and then relieved from Konkan Railway Corporation Ltd. By an order dated 14.04.1999 of the 3rd respondent, he was mistakenly posted as Supervisor/Works in the scale of Rs.4500-7000 in Madurai Division as against the post equivalent to Permanent Way Maistry as there was no sanctioned cadre of Supervisor/Works in Madurai Division. This bona fide mistake was duly noticed and informed by order dated 07.10.1999 of the third respondent. The 4th respondent passed an order dated 05.11.1999, rectifying the defect after assigning his correct position in the seniority list. Accordingly, the petitioner was posted as Gangmate in the scale of Rs.3050-4590 in Permanent Way Section and was placed between Thangamuthu and Peya Thevar. Questioning the same, the petitioner has approached the Central Administrative Tribunal. The
AI
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
