PETITIONER:
LAKSHMI NARAYAN
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
UNION INDIA AND OTHERS
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 02/12/1996
BENCH:
N.P. SINGH, K. VENKATASWAMI
ACT
HEADNOTE
JUDGMENT
JUDGMENT
Venkataswami. j.
Leave granted.
The third respondent Govind sahai was promoted by a order dated 24.4.1976 as Diesel Foreman. Aggrieved by that, the appellant challenged that order of promotion by filing Writ Petition (Civil) No. 153 of 1978 in the High Court of Rajasthan which was subsequently transferred to the Central Administrative Tribunal and numbered as T.A.No. 359/86. According to the appellant, the said govind Sahai was junior to hm as Diesel Chargeman ’C’ Grade and the promotion of the said Govind Sahai overlooking seniority of petitioner was liable to be quashed.
The Tribunal while noticing the admitted position that prior to 1969, the third respondent was junior to the appellant found from records valid reasons for overlooking the claims of the appellant. The Tribunal after noticing the relevant factor observed as follows:-
Admitted position is that Govind
Sahai was promoted in 1969 as
Chargeman on the reversion of the
applicant and the applicant was
again promoted in 1970 and he was
again reverted and subsequently he
was promoted in 1972. Naturally,
Govind Sahai who was junior entered
the Higher grade in 1969 and
continued to hold the same,
eventually the length of service of
higher grade will have to counted.
It was not stop-gap arrangement but
it was on the action of reversion
of the applicant that Govind Sahai
was promoted. The promotion of
Govind Sahai of Higher post on
24.4.1976 is also good as he was
holding the post of the Chargeman
from 1969 whereas the applicant was
holding the post from 1971. So,
naturally, Govind sahai was
entitled for promotion earlier than
the applicant and there is nothing
wrong in it."
It is also seen from the records that as early as in 1976. The representation made by the appellant to treat him as a senior to Govind Sahai was rejected by the Railway Board in their communication no RB/OSD/ER/279/96/Aii dated 4.5.1976. The said communication inter alia reads as follows:-
He (the appellant) was assigned
seniority with reference to date of
his joining the working post in
terms of orders contained in
Railway Board’s letter No. e(NG) 60
SR 6/2 of 16.11.1961 according to
which seniority of direct recruits
and rankers in the vacancies
arising on and after 16.11.1961 is
to be fixed with reference to the
date of joining the working post in
the case of former and the date of
promotion in the case of latter
subject to the condition that the
inter se seniority of the staff in
the respective group is not
disturbed. He was promoted to scale
Rs. 250-380 (A) with effect from
22.6.72 and prior to this he was
promoted twice and on both the
occasions he was reverted due to
unsatisfactory work and accordingly
he lost seniority over those who
were promoted during the period he
was not considered suitable for
promotion.
(Emphasis supplied)
It is also seen from the records that the appellant was not successful in challenging his earlier reversions. It is also not shown that the appellant has successfully challenged the Railway Board’s communication dated 4.5.1976.
In spite of the above clear position, the appellant who appeared in person repeatedly argued challenging his reversions in the year 1969 and 1971. We do not think that we can entertain that argument to challenge the promotion give to the third respondent, particularly, in the light of Railway Board’s communication dated 4.53.76 in which the appellant was clearly informed that he has lost his seniority to said govind Sahai.
In the circumstances, we do not find any substance in the appeal and the same is dismissed accordingly. However, there will be order as to costs.