Back
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Mr. Sunil Thomas, J, Ms. V. Rama Mathew, A
Arun Sankar P – Appellant
Versus
Union of India, represented by The General Manager, Southern Railway – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. entry of applicants into the promoted list based on the age of experience. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. claim of arbitrary rejection for promotion based on prior service. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. court acknowledges complexity in seniority and eligibility. (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 4. distinction between service counting and seniority. (Para 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 5. supreme court's stance on seniority and eligibility interactions. (Para 11 , 12) |
| 6. final conclusions on applicants' claims for promotion. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
ORDER
Per: Justice Sunil Thomas, Judicial Member –
All the applicants were appointed in the Chennai Division of Southern Railway during the period 2016-2017 as Assistants in Carriage and Wagon (C&W) Wing of Southern Railway. While so, they were transferred on request of the applicants to Palakkad and on transfer they joined Palakkad Division during various dates in May, 2022. While so, Annexure A1 notification dated 31.8.2022 for selection to the post of Technician-II in C&W against 25% LDCE quota was issued. The concerned Rule governing the skilled Artisan including the applicants was Rule 159 of Indian Railway Establishment Manual (IREM), a copy of which was produced as Annexu
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
