GHANSHYAM MEENA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We have heard Shri S.K. Shukla for the Petitioner. Shri Govind Saran appears for the Respondents.

(2.) The Petitioner was directly recruited as Sub Inspector in Railway Protection Force on 27.8.1990 as a Scheduled Tribe candidate. He was promoted on the post of Inspector Grade-II on 21.12.1998, and Inspector Grade-I on 26.12.2001 vide F.O. No. 160/2001. His pay was fixed by the Divisional Security Commissioner, by his order No. 02/2002 dated 23.1.2002 in the pay scale of Rs. 6500-10500+200, as special salary admissible to Inspector Grade-I, RPF.

(3.) It is stated that Rule 78 of the Railway Protection Force Rules, 1987 provides for the rank structure. After the creation of new Railway Zone (East Central Railways), on bifurcation of Eastern Railway w.e.f. 1.1.2002, the Petitioner was within the jurisdiction of East Central Railway. The post of Assistant Security Commissioner is of the same rank that of Assistant Commandant. A list of promotion to the post of Assistant Security Commissioner of 127 candidates, was published on 16.2.2006. Only 35 candidates, out of this list, were in the Inspector Grade-I, and remaining persons were in the Inspector Grade n. The Petitioner's claim was ignored inspite of the fact that he is serving as Inspector Grade-I. The Petitioner gave a reminder on 31.1.2007 and after making several representations filed a Writ Petition No. 15083 of 2007, in which an order was passed on 26.3.2007 to decide his representation. It is alleged that the Director General, RPF, has erred in finding that since the Petitioner was not promoted as Inspector Grade-I on 10.1.1997, his name does not appear in the seniority list issued on 4.5.2006.