NEENA VALERIAN Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present original petition is directed against the judgment of the Central Administrative Tribunal, whereby, relying upon Annexure-R3 circular dtd. 21/4/2017 and misinterpretation of Rule 183 of the Indian Railway Establishment Manual, applicants/petitioners have been denied the right to sit in the written examination for the purpose of promotion to the post of Commercial Clerk from the Group 'D' posts.

(2.) Rule 128 of the Railway Manual, Clause (iii) reads as follows:

(3.) The expression "concerned seniority unit" would not mean that, on every transfer the employees posted would have to maintain a separate seniority. It has to be treated as from the date of the recruitment. Clause (iii) of Rule 128 says a person must have completed two years of service. Two years of service even on transfer before two years or on normal transfer, cannot take away the right of service put in by any individual in Group 'D' posts. Concededly, all the applicants in Tiruchirappalli, when they were appointed in 2014, had served less than two years and thereafter, in Thiruvananthapuram, had served more than two years, thus were entitled to sit in the written examination in terms of the notification Annexure A6 dtd. 30/6/2017 under the orders of the Central Administrative Tribunal. The applicants had availed the chance of written examination, but ultimately the OA was dismissed by giving the following findings in paragraphs 16 to 19 of the judgment: