UNION OF INDIA Vs. CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present writ petition has been filed by the Union of India, represented by the General Manager, Southern Railway and three other petitioners, namely The Chief Personnel Officer, Southern Railway, The Divisional Railway Manager, Chennai Division, Southern Railway and The Senior Divisional Operating Manager, Chennai Division, Southern Railway. The affidavit in support of the writ petition has been filed by the Senior Divisional Personnel Officer, Chennai Division, Southern Railway, on behalf of all the petitioners. The petitioners challenge the order of the Tribunal dated 28. 3. 2001 in O. A. No. 920 of 2000.

(2.) THE reason for filing of the Original Application started with the issuance of the notification by the Chief Personnel Officer, Southern Railway, Headquarters Office, Personnel Branch, Chennai-3, bearing No. P (S ). 608/ii/tfc. App. /ldce, dated 28. 6. 1999, calling for application from eligible employees. The said notification dated 28. 6. 1999 reads as follows:

(3.) THE second respondent herein is the applicant in the Original Application before the Tribunal. His case before the Tribunal is as follows: the second respondent herein joined the Railway Service in the year 1985 and working as Station Master Grade-III in the scale of pay of Rs. 5000-8000. The cadre of Station Master is structured as follows: <FRM>JUDGEMENT_722_TLMAD0_2006Html1.htm</FRM> It is the case of the second respondent that he will be eligible for consideration for promotion to the next higher grade of Station Master Grade-II, in the scale of Rs. 5500-9000 but in view of the notification dated 28. 6. 1999 stating that the Department proposes to recruit Traffic Apprentices by Limited Departmental Competitive Examination under 10% quota open to serving graduates in Group 'c' of the Operating Branch, his chances of promotion are being deprived. It is contended by the second respondent that such reservation or pinpointing of posts in anticipation for the so-called Traffic Apprentices who are not available for appointment at the time of issuance of the notification and for appointment to regular posts after successful completion of the training for a period of two years, would affect his promotional career and therefore, the second respondent filed the Original Application before the first respondent-Tribunal for the following relief: