MADHUKAR RAGHUNATH NAFDAY Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BEING aggrieved by an order of reversion dated August 6, 1968, the Petitioner has moved this court in the Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction and has obtained the aforesaid rule challenging the validity of the said order of reversion; he has prayed for an appropriate writ for quashing the same.

(2.) MATERIAL facts are not in dispute. Petitioner had earlier joined the army and was a commissioned officer serving from 1943 to 1948 with the corps of royal Indian Engineers (Electrical and mechanical Group ). Being disbanded therefrom in 1948 he was appointed a class I officer with the Railways as a war service candidate. Such appointment was on Selection by the Public service Commission. On April 16, 1948, he joined the Ex. Bengal Nagpur Railway as a probationer in Mechanical engineering and Transport (Power)department of the Superior Revenue establishment of the State Railway in the grade of Rs. 350-850/ -. He was conferred seniority with effect from april 1, 1945. On competition of the probationary period on March 29, 1949, he was appointed an Assistant Loco and carriage Superintendent-a post in the junior scale. He was confirmed in the said cadre on April 16, 1951. On april 26, 1951 lie was promoted to the senior scale and was appointed a District Loco and Carriage Superintendent. He was confirmed in the said cadre on may 15, 1955. On September 23, 1961, he was further promoted to officiate in the Junior Administrative grade of rs. 1300-1600/-, and was posted as deputy Chief Mechanical Engineer (Headquarters), Kharagpur. Such appointment was approved by the Railway board by its order dated November 27, 1961. He took over charge as the deputy Chief Mechanical Engineer on october 1, 1961 and was transferred as surfed to the Head Office at Garden reach on May 1, 1961. At the Head office he was posted as the Deputy Chief mechanical Engineer Carriage and wagon ). After the petitioner had continuously served the administration as a Deputy Chief Mechanical Engineer from October 1, 1961 till August 3, 1968, he was reverted on the latter date to the senior scale by the impugned order of: the Railway Board. The Chief Personnel officer communicated the order by his memo dated August 6, 1968.

(3.) ACCORDING to the petitioner for the entire period he served the Railway administration as the Deputy Chief mechanical Engineer, his service was quite- satisfactory and there was no adverse report against him except in december 1967 when the Chief Mechanical engineer informed him verbally that he had been getting average reports and the Board desired that his work should improve. Contrary to this position on May 27, 1967, Petitioner was sponsored by the Railway Administration for appointment as an Additional chief Mechanical Engineer with the fertiliser Corporation of India a post higher in rank than the one held by him. It is only in the background of these circumstances that he was reverted. According to the respondents, Petitioner had been consistently receiving average reports since the time he was officiating as a Deputy Chief Engineer; his work showed no improvement, the board issued a warning letter which was communicated to the petitioner by the chief Mechanical Engineer and because of such reports he was ultimately reverted. It is, however, not the Respondents' case before this Court that but for the verbal warning of December 1967, any adverse entry in the confidential reports was ever communicated to the Petitioner though he had been serving as a Deputy chief Mechanical Engineer since october 1, 1961. Upon Respondents; own admission, therefore, on petitioner's performance he was considered unsuitable to be retained in the Junior Administrative grade wherein he had been officiating since October 1961 and was reverted by the impugned order. The only dispute now before this Court is as to whether such reversion after nearly 7 years is in accordance wish law or not