R.K. JHA Vs. COAL INDIA LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order will also govern disposal of W.P. No.3390/2011 and W.P. No.8690/2011 as common question and common claims are made in the writ petitions. Since all the writ petitions are heard together, the same are being decided by this common order. For the purposes of convenience, the facts are taken from W.P. No.6388/2010.

(2.) The petitioners have complained by way of filing this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India that they are not given the similar treatment as was extended to certain employees in terms of an agreement entered into between the employer-respondents and the Employees' Association and the order passed thereon. It is the contention of petitioners that there was anomaly created in the matter of appointments in Grade-C category posts. Those, who were appointed in the said category, were upgraded as Grade-B under the orders of the respondents and were given further opportunities of promotion but the similar treatment has been denied to the petitioners by way of passing of order impugned dated 16.04.2010, therefore, such an order was called in question.

(3.) Brief facts are that the petitioners were said to be appointed as Assistant Foreman (Trainee) Grade-C during the year 1995-1997. They were later on promoted as Foreman Grade-B in the year 2002 and further promoted as Foreman Incharge Grade-A in the year 2009-2010. In fact in the matter of appointment, different norms were prescribed by different companies, affiliated to the Coal India Limited and this has created anomaly in the matter of appointment in different grades. The issues were raised by the Trade Unions of the subsidiary companies of the Coal India Limited, a Government of India undertaking, and an agreement was entered into for removal of the said anomaly. As a result, those, who were appointed in Grade- C services, were upgraded from the initial date of appointment in Grade-B. Consequent upon such upgradation, those who were promoted in Grade-B were treated to be promoted in next higher grade with retrospective effect, as a result the persons like petitioners, who were earlier upgraded, were promoted up to the executive post. Similar was the claim of the petitioners and in terms of the policy once made, petitioners were also entitled to the similar treatment of upgradation of their initial post of appointment and further upgradation in the matter of promotion to the next higher grade. However, since this has been refused by memo dated 16.04.2010, the writ petition was required to be filed. The petitioners have claimed a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to treat the petitioners at par with similarly situated Diploma Holder Foreman and further a writ for promotion/ selection from non executive to executive cadre as per the notification dated 08.03.2010, after quashment of the circular dated 16.04.2010 by issuance of a writ of certiorari.