ARUN KUMAR JAISWAL Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE sole petitioner has been finally promoted to the post of Head Ticket Collector by office order no. 43, dated 17.3.1998. There is no controversy so far as this promotion is concerned. What is in controversy is his earlier promotion to the post w.e.f. 30.11.1984 and his subsequent ''reversion'' to the post to Senior Ticket Collector by order dated 8.5.1999. The petitioner maintains that he was wrongly reverted to the post of Senior Ticket Collector by order dated 8.5.1990 and his promotion to the post of Head Ticket Collector should, therefore, be reckoned w.e.f. 30.11.1984.

(2.) ON the earlier occasion, the petitioner alongwith seven other persons was given promotion from the post of Senior Ticket Collector to that of the Head Ticket Collector by order dated 30.11.1984. In that promotion panel, the petitioner figured at the bottom at serial no. 8. Two persons above him at serial nos. 7 and 8 were Ramayan Mishra and Akhilesh Kumar. The last three in the promotion panel, including the petitioner, were later reverted to the post of Senior Ticket Collector by order dated 8.5.1990. All the three challenged the order of reversion by filing separate Original Application before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna. The petitions filed by the other two persons were disposed of by the Tribunal before the case of the present petitioner was taken up. The petition of Akhilesh Kumar (O.A. no. 45 of 1991) was rejected by order dated 4.9.1992 whereas the petition filed by Ramayan Mishra (O.A. no. 518 of 1990) was allowed on 16.9.1991 on the ground that the reversion was held to be violative of Article 311 (2) of the Constitution of India.

(3.) THE Full Bench of the Tribunal held that the so -called reversion of the petitioner and the other two persons was simply a case of correcting a mistake by the railway authorities. It was found and held that while granting promotion to the eight persons, including the three applicants before the Tribunal in 1984 the claim of three other persons was over looked by mistake and when this fact came to notice the petitioners were put back on their substantive posts of Senior Ticket Collector.