M MALARVANNAN Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the arguments of Mr. P.V.S. Giridhar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. V. Radhakrishnan, learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the Railways and perused the records.

(2.) THE petitioner, an unsuccessful applicant before the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) in O.A. No. 1044 of 2001 has filed the present writ petition. After seeking to set aside the order dated 24.10.2002, confirming the order dated 04.4.2001 passed by the fourth respondent Union of India, he seeks for reinstatement and regularisation in the post of Radiographer - III with all consequential benefits.

(3.) MR. P.V.S. Giridhar, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner had put in 7-1/2 years of service and at the time of initial appointment, as a substitute stenographer, he had the necessary qualification. He also stated that he was working against a permanent post in the ICF Hospital and the Chief Personnel Officer had also recommended his case for regularization. He further submitted that he has been given the status of temporary Railway servant and as per paragraph 5.5. of the consolidated circular dated 29.01.1991, he need not undergo a regular selection. It is enough if a screening committee goes through the petitioner's credentials and recommend his case for absorption. He also submitted that the amended Rules will not apply to the petitioner's case.