(1.) Common question arises for consideration in these cases. Hence we are disposing of these cases by a common judgment. We may deal with the facts in O.P. 9005/2001 for disposal of these cases. Petitioners approached the Tribunal to recast the seniority in the different grades of Commercial Clerks in Palakkad Division, Southern Railway with retrospective effect by implementing the decision of the Supreme Court in Ajith Singh (II) (1999 (7) SCC 209) and the order of the Tribunal dated 6.9.1994 in O.A. 552/90 and connected cases and to refix their seniority and promotions accordingly with consequential benefits. Common question arises for consideration in these cases. Hence we are disposing of these cases by a common judgment. We may deal with the facts in O.P. 9005/2001 for disposal of these cases. Petitioners approached the Tribunal to recast the seniority in the different grades of Commercial Clerks in Palakkad Division, Southern Railway with retrospective effect by implementing the decision of the Supreme Court in Ajith Singh (II) (1999 (7) SCC 209) and the order of the Tribunal dated 6.9.1994 in O.A. 552/90 and connected cases and to refix their seniority and promotions accordingly with consequential benefits.
(2.) Complaint of the petitioners was that while they were working as Commercial Clerks in the entry grade in Palakkad Division their junior who belong to SC/ST community were promoted erroneously applying 40 point roster on arising vacancies superseding the seniority. For recruitment and promotions in service, 22.5% of the post is reserved for members of the SC/ST communities. To ensure that, a mechanism of 40 point roster is employed in the matter of promotions. Reservation is to be applied on cadre strength and not on vacancies and the seniority of the reserved and unreserved category of employees in the lower category would be reflected in the promoted category also notwithstanding earlier promotions. Obtained by the reserved category candidates. Complaints were raised that Railway Administration is promoting SC/ST candidates overlooking the legitimate claim of seniors. The unreserved category candidates challenged the said action of the Railways in the High Court of Allahabad in C.J. Mallick v. Union of India, 1978 (1) SLR 844. The High Court held that the reservation would be applied on cadre strength and not on arising vacancies. Matter was taken up before the Apex Court in C.A. No. 2017/78. Apex Court vide interim order dated 24.2.1984 granted relief to unreserved categories of employees. Later Railway Administration issued letter No. 85 E (SCT)/49/2 dated 26.2.1985 referring to the various interim orders passed by the Apex Court in the matter of reservation for SC/ST candidates and stated as follows: "All promotions should be deemed as provisional and subject to the final disposal of the writ petition by the Supreme Court." Yet another letter dated 25.4.1985 was issued by the Railway Administration relying upon similar orders issued by the Madras High Court. In this connection it may be pointed out that a telex/telegram was issued with reference to P. (GS) 608/XLL/2/H/Vol. XXI dated 25.4.1985 dealing with the same issue. It is stated therein as follows:
(3.) Applying those principles Railway Administration was directed by the Tribunal to work out the reliefs of the applicants therein. We may indicate that the writ petitioners herein were applicants in those O.A.s such as O.A. 552/90, 483/91 etc. The above mentioned decision of the Tribunal was taken up before the Apex Court in Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No. 10691/95 etc. with a petition for condonation of delay. Delay was condoned and the court ordered as follows: