1 hvn IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 2042 OF 2008 WRIT PETITION NO. 2042 OF 2008 WRIT PETITION NO. 2042 OF 2008 Union of India and anr... Petitioner Versus Shri. C.T. Adsule & Another Respondents Mr.Arun H. Patil for the Petitioner. Mr.Rahul G. Walia for the Respondents. CORAM: F.I. REBELLO, & CORAM: F.I. REBELLO, & CORAM: F.I. REBELLO, & J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED: NOVEMBER 12, 2008 DATED: NOVEMBER 12, 2008 DATED: NOVEMBER 12, 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C. . The Union of India has challenged the order of CAT in O.A. No. 534 of 2005 dated 31.12.2007. By the said order the Petitioners have been directed to consider the case of the respondents herein for the purpose of promotion to the post of Chief Permanent Way inspector and also to the post of Assistance Executive Engineer according to rules and in case he is found suitable, he should be given the same with consequential benefits. . We may set out a few facts including the previous litigations between the parties. The Petitioner was initially appointed as Permanent Way Mistry and the next promotional post was that of Permanent Way Inspector. The recruitment to that post was by 2 direct recruitment (2/3rd) and partially by way of promotions from eligible departmental candidates with two years service in the feeder cadre Permanent Way Mistry (1/3rd). As the respondent was not considered, he field O.A. contending that there were vacancies in the year 1991-92 in the grade of Permanent Way inspector in the promotional quota. His further grievance was that in the meantime, direct recruits came to be appointed and thereby he had lost his seniority. O.A. No. 1030 of 1995 was decided on 20.4.2001. Directions amongst others was to prepare seniority as set out and other consequential directions as set out in the order. The respondents it appears have challenged the said order in W.P. No. 455 of 2002. . Consequent to the directions issued for seniority, the respondent No. 2 and others approached the tribunal by O.A. No. 657 of 2002. That was decided by order dated 4.7.2003 with the directions as set out in the order. That order was not challenged by the Petitioners herein. The respondents on failure by the Petitioner to comply with the order filed a contempt petition before the tribunal. The Petitioners herein made a statement in the contempt Petition that the respondents would be considered subject to the outcome of the writ Petition No. 455 of 2002. The respondents 3 thereafter has been promoted to the post of permanent Way Inspector Grade I. . The Petitioner further filed O.A. from which the present petition arises. In that petition, the grievance was that he should be considered for the post of Chief Permanent Way Inspector and also for the post of Assistant Executive Engineer. Once the Petitioner has not challenged the directions passed in O.A. No. 657 of 2002 which directed that the Petitioner should be considered for appointment to the post of Permanent Way Inspector Grade I, in our opinion, the present challenge must fail as it is purely consequential. The post of Permanent Way Inspector Grade I is a feeder post in consideration to the post of Chief Permanent Way Inspector and thereafter the post of Assistant Executive Engineer. The only direction that we can give in this petition would be that if the Petitioner is selected and promoted to the post of Chief Permanent Way Inspector and post of Assistant Executive Engineer, these promotions will be subject to the order that may be passed in W.P. No. 455 of 2002. . With the above observations, Petition disposed of. 4 (J.P. DEVADHAR, J.) (J.P. DEVADHAR, J.) (J.P. DEVADHAR, J.) (F.I. REBELLO,J.) (F.I. REBELLO,J.) (F.I. REBELLO,J.)