LAXAMAN VINAY SIRSAT Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is directed against an order by which the petitioner has been absorbed in an alternative appointment and not given a further opportunity to qualify in a refresher course.

(2.) THE matter arises thus: THE petitioner was appointed as a Guard in the erstwhile State of Gwalior, in Gwalior State Railway service. Consequent on taking over the State Railway by the Central Government, he was absorbed as a guard in Category 'C under the Indian Government services. THE petitioner opted for the rules of the Indian (Government) Railways Rules and conditions of service. THEre is no dispute that he was governed by the Indian (Government) Railway Rules as were in force at the relevant time. THE petitioner was promoted in category 'B' of the Guards. In course of time he crossed the efficiency bar and was confirmed as a guard in category 'B'.

(3.) THE petitioner could have been transferred to an alternative job not involving train passing/operation duties when he failed to qualify in the refresher course No. 84. THE Railway Board by another letter No. E (Trg) 1-67-TRI/96 dated 4-9-1967, directed that the staff engaged in train passing / operation duties, failing in the second attempt in the refresher course be finally absorbed in the alternative category not involving train passing/operation duties. However, by this letter, such a person could further take advantage of the refresher course at an interval of six months, but the repeat course was to be taken by availing of his own leave. Under this letter, the petitioner had to be absorbed in the alternative category as he no longer remained eligible for train passing/operation duties. THE petitioner, after he failed for the second time, therefore, did not remain eligible to perform the duties of a guard till he passed the refresher course. By a third Circular letter No. E (TRG)-167- TRI/69 dated 8-10-1968, the Railway Board directed that the persons absorbed in the alternative categories consequent on their failing in the second chance of the periodical refresher course, could be allowed to undertake further refresher course at an interval of minimum six months bv availing of their own leave. THE extract from this letter is reproduced below, as by this letter, it was finally directed that a person failing in the second chance could only be given one more opportunity lor appearing in the refresher course: