INDRADEO A DESHMUKH Vs. MANOHAR N Y

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The short question raised by this petition relates to the matter of absorption and fixation of seniority of employees who were directly recruited and appointed in the grainshop department of the Central Railway, to which category of recruits the petitioner belongs. The impugned orders or directives of the Railway Board are dated 2 November, 1957 and 13 January, 1961 whereby a distinction has been made in the aforesaid matters of absorption and fixation of seniority between

(2.) On this question certain admitted facts may be stated : It appears that during the period of the Second World War as extreme difficulty was experienced in the matter of procurement of essential foodgrains, the Railway Board favoured establishment of grainshops on the several railways operating in the country so that the several railway employees could get foodgrains at cheaper and reasonable rates. Accordingly, towards the end of December, 1941 or beginning of 1942 the Central Railway established grainshop department at various places to enable its employees to get foodgrains at cheap and reasonable rates. It is further common ground that the recruitment to this grainshop department was made from three different channels or categories, viz. :

(3.) It is common ground, however, that all these persons were temporary employees of the Central Railway. After the cessation of hostilities with the end of the Second World War, it appears that the Railway Board thought of abolishing these grainshop departments gradually and the Railway Board adopted the policy out of humane considerations that all the temporary staff working in the grainshop departments should be absorbed in one or the other of the permanent departments of the railways. With that end in view the Railway Board issued several communications and directives pursuant to which employees working in grainshop departments were absorbed on a permanent basis in one or the other of the permanent departments of the railways and whenever occasion arose even by creating supernumerary posts. Such absorption led to several problems of various complexities, especially in regard to the sums of pay that were to be drawn by such employees after their absorption and their seniority in the department consequent upon their absorption. On 16 October, 1952 the Railway Board issued a letter No. E16RE1/1/3 in supersession of the earlier orders of the Board contained in the letter dated 6 July, 1949. The Railway Board's letter dated 16 October, 1952 after dealing with the question of protection of pay of the temporary grainshop department staff, which was absorbed in other departments, also dealt with the question of their seniority in the absorbing departments and the Railway Board categorically stated in its said letter as follows :