Y.S. CHAUDHARY Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this common order, we propose to dispose of the OA 280/2008 and OA 2661/2010, as they involve identical issues of facts and law. The issue involved in the above OAs is whether the delay in convening meeting of the DPCs by the respondents (Railway Board) in the case of the applicants was due to reasons beyond control or because of administrative delay/inefficiency and what would be the consequence if the delay on the part of the respondents is not found to be explained/justified. For the sake of convenience, it would be necessary to briefly record the facts of the case in Writ Petition (C) No.2020/2011 [arising out of OA No.280/2008 filed by Shri Y.S.Chaudhary and Others].

(2.) In this OA the applicant and four others were Group 'B officers and had been substantively appointed in Group 'A/Junior Scale of the IRSE with effect from 14.1.2005 vide Ministry of Railways Notification dated 23.03.2005 and their revised inter se seniority in IRSE on their promotion to Group A from Group B was circulated vide Ministry of Railways notification dated 18.5.2006. They were aggrieved by the delayed induction from Group B to Group A. Being dissatisfied, they approached the tribunal in OA No. 280/2008 for setting aside the notification dated 18.5.2006 issued by the respondent inducting the applicants in Group A Junior Scale of IRSE with effect from 14.1.2005, instead of from 2002 -03 when the vacancies arose and further to direct the respondents to give them the promotion/induction in Group A Junior Scale IRSE from the date when the vacancies arose in 2002 -03 instead from 14.1.2005 when the DPC was conducted.

(3.) It is the case of the applicants that their promotions should be made effective from 1.4.2002 as the DPCs for induction to Group A for the vacancies of 2002 -2003 ought to have been conducted before December, 2001 to be effective from 1.4.2002 (for the vacancies of the year 2001, for panel of 2002 -2003) but the respondents failed to take any action in this regard. It is contended that when clear vacancies in Junior Scale Group A of IRSE were available and eligible Group B officers with the requisite non fortuitous service were also available, there was no justification for the delayed induction and the action of the respondent for delayed promotion to Group A Junior Scale of IRSE from Group B with effect from 14.1.2005 (instead of 1.4.2005) against the vacancies of 2002 -2003 is highly illegal and prejudicial to their interest. It was averred that the applicants had been inducted against the vacancies pertaining to the examination year 2001 (vacancies of 2002 -2003) in the promotion segment of Group A Junior Scale of IRSE for the year 2002 -03 and according to the guidelines of the Department of Personnel & Training (DOPT), the panel for the vacancy for the year 2002 -03 should have been available on 1.4.2002 whereas it was made effective from 14.01.2005, the date of the DPC, as a consequence of which the applicants have been placed under the direct recruit IRSE officers of 1998 Officers Examination Batch, causing loss of more than three years in their seniority and future promotional prospects for no fault of theirs. It was contended that the DOPT instructions prescribed taking of advance action for filling up vacancies of a year and for convening of DPCs of Group B officers for promotion to Group A well in time so as to be effective from the next calendar year, but the respondents had failed to follow these instructions. We had, vide our order dated 29.01.2010 in OA 280/2008, after going through the rival contentions raised at the Bar and discussing the authorities which were cited relating to grant of benefit of retrospective promotion relating to DPC and the requirements of following the instructions of DOPT, partly allowed the Original Application by quashing the notification dated 18.05.2006 and had directed as follows: 35. The impugned notification dated 18.05.2006 is quashed and set aside. The respondents are directed to convene a review DPC to consider the promotion/induction of the applicants from the date when the vacancies arose in 2002 -2003, and thereafter to pass appropriate follow up orders with regard to their seniority in Group A, subject to it being ensured that the seniority accorded does not result in the applicants superseding officers who were senior to them in Group 'B and have already been promoted to Group A. This may be done within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Based on our order, a Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal had passed a similar order dated 23.12.2010 in OA No.2661/2010. The matter was carried to the High Court of Delhi in WP (C) No.2020/2011 and WP (C) No.1353/2011, which, vide its order dated 30.05.2011, remanded the case back to this Tribunal with directions to afford the applicants to implead the necessary parties (direct recruits) and proceed afresh. The relevant portions of the order of the High Court of Delhi are extracted below: