B K BHOSALE Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Heard forthwith. The petitioners are aggrieved by the order dated 3rd August, 2006 passed by the Central administrative Tribunal, Bombay Bench at Mumbai. Petitioners are presently working as announcers in the establishment of the Central Railway. They have approached the Tribunal amongst others for the following reliefs :

(2.) On behalf of the petitioners, the learned counsel submits that the learned tribunal misdirected itself in law in not granting relief to the petitioners. It is submitted that the petitioners are working in Group C posts, for about 10 years as announcers. As this service is long and continuous, it cannot be termed as ad-hoc. The petitioners were selected by inviting applications from Group D staff and only after passing the selection process. Non-regularisation of the petitioners in group C posts, it is submitted, is violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the constitution of India. On behalf of respondents, it is submitted that appointment of the petitioners was purely on ad-hoc basis and the petitioners were aware of the same. There is no existing cadre. The petitioners are not holding regular posts and they are to be considered for promotion in their regular cadre, as and when they became eligible. Their seniority is also to be considered in the parent cadre. As there are no regular posts and no cadre, the question of regularisation of petitioners does not arise. It is further submitted that creation of posts or cadre is purely an administrative act of the respondents and no writ can go to the respondents on that ground. For all the aforesaid reasons, it is submitted that the petition filed by the petitioners challenging the order of CAT is not maintainable, as the order of CAT does not suffer from any error of law apparent on the fact of the record. It is submitted that the petition be dismissed.

(3.) It is in that context that we shall have to examine the contentions urged on behalf of the petitioners. The posts of announcers carry the pay-scale of Group C post. Originally they could be filled in from employees working in Group C, who volunteered. The respondent railway board on 10-1-1991 had issued a circular for filling 20 vacancies of announcers from staff working in the groups 950-1500 (RPS) to Rs. 1600-2060 (RPS). Applications were also invited from Group D staff who had qualifications as set out therein. It was provided that the selected candidates will carry their grade and pay in their respective parent cadre and their seniority was to be maintained in their respective cadre in the parent department and they will continue to be considered for promotions in the parent cadre by virtue of their performance and position in their parent cadre during the period, they continue to work as announcer. The tenure period of one year could be extended at the discretion of the administration. Another circular came to be issued on 10-1-1996. It was noted that the Division was facing problems to fill in the posts of announcers from Group C staff and as such volunteers from Group D staff had to be considered. They, however, were drawing scales of Group D Staff. A policy decision was therefore, taken that they would be paid in the Group C Scale. The circular made it clear that posting of persons working as announcers in Group C is purely on ad hoc basis and their seniority, promotion would be considered in the parent cadre for further promotion. The next circular was issued on 18-2-1999. Applications were invited from Staff working in pay scales 2750-4400 (RP) to 4000-6000 (RP). It was again reiterated that the selected candidates will carry their grade and pay enjoyed in their respective parent cadre. It was again reiterated that seniority, promotions, etc. would be in their parent cadre. A similar circular came to be issued on 4-12-2001. By another circular of 2003 vacancies of announcers were allowed to be filled in from Group C and Group D posts. It was made clear that selected candidates from Group D will be posted as announcers in pay scale 3050-4590 (RS RS) on purely ad-hoc basis, since it is an ex-cadre post. It was further clarified that the selected candidates will carry their grade, pay, seniority, promotion and pay fixation in their parent cadre and cannot be considered for further promotion. Similar circulars have been issued from time to time. The last of the said circular brought to our attention was dated 2-6-2004. From the above circulars, it would be clear that even though group D employees were held eligible to be considered for appointment as announcers, for the purpose of seniority, promotion and other benefits, is in their respective cadre. There is no cadre of announcers. Neither have the respondents framed any rules for appointment/promotion to the said posts, but have issued instructions as to the minimum requirements for being considered/appointed. It is therefore, clear that those who have been selected as announcers continue to hold their lien in the parent department, even though they are working on promotion the post of announcers pursuant to their selection but on a purely temporary basis. In this context, the question arises as to whether impugned order can be said to suffer from any error of law apparent on the face of the record.