Back
K. S. HEGDE, R. S. BACHAWAT, K. N. WANCHOO, G. K. MITTER, V. RAMASWAMI
Roshan Lal Tandonkunj Behari: Kunj Behari – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent
Yes, the Supreme Court held that once recruits from different sources (e.g., direct recruits and promotees) are integrated into one common grade (Grade D Train Examiners), they form one class and cannot be differentiated or discriminated against for the purpose of further promotion to the higher grade (Grade C Train Examiners). (!) (!) (!) (!)
Judgment
RAMASWAMI, J. : In this case the petitioner, Roshan Lal Tandon has obtained a rule from this Court calling upon the respondents to show cause why a writ in the nature of mandamus under Art. 32 of the Constitution of India should not be issued commanding the respondents not to carry out the directives contained in the notification of the Railway Board No. E(NG)65 PM 1-26, dated the 27th October 1965, Annexure D to the Writ Petition, in so far as it grants protection to the existing Apprentice Train Examiners and lays down the procedure to fill upgraded vacancies. Cause has been shown by the respondents to whom notice of the rule was ordered to be given.
2. There were originally two scales for Train Examiners - Rs. 100-185 ( D Grade) and Rs. 150-225 ( C Grade). These scales were later revised as a result of the recommendations of the Second Pay Commission and the scale of D Grade was increased to Rs. 180-240 and that of C Grade to Rs. 205-280. On February 18, 1961 the Railway Board issued a letter No. PC-60/ PS5/TP/8, Annexure A to the Writ Petition to the General Managers of all Indian Railways conveying its decision that vacancies in the Entry Grade of Train Examin
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
