IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN FRIDAY, THE 2ND SEPTEMBER 2011 / 11TH BHADRA 1933 OP (CAT).No. 1176 of 2011(z) ---------------------------- (AGAINST ORDER DATED 12/11/2010 IN OA.704/2010 of CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,ERNAKULAM BENCH) .................... PETITIONERS ------------------------------- 1. SENIOR DIVISIONAL PERSONNEL OFFICER, SOUTHERN RAILWAY,TRIVANDRUM-14. 2. DIVISIONAL RAILWAY MANAGER, SOUTHERN RAILWAY, TRIVANDRUM-14. BY ADV. SRI.C.S.DIAS,SC, RAILWAYS RESPONDENT(S): --------------- M.K.KARTHIAYANI, MULLATHADATHIL HOUSE, PUDUKAD.P.O., SOUTH THORAVU, PIN-680301. ADV. SRI.K.C.CHARLES FOR R SRI.M.POLY MATHAI FOR R SRI.P.CHELLAPPAN FOR R SRI.E.N.HARI FOR R THIS OP (CAT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/09/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: OP(CAT) NO.1176/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1 : COPY OF OA NO.704/2010 FILED BEFORE THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM BENCH. P2 : COPY OF REPLY STATEMENT FILED BY THE PETITIONERS IN O.A.NO.704/2010 BEFORE THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM BENCH. P3 : COPY OF FINAL ORDER DATED 12/11/2011 IN O.A.NO.704/2010 OF THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM BENCH. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS R1(a) : COPY OF ANNEXURE A2 //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE. jg C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. .................................................................... OP(CAT) No.1176 of 2011 .................................................................... Dated this the 2nd day of September, 2011. J U D G M E N T Ramachandran Nair, J. This OP(CAT) is filed challenging Ext.P3 order of the Central Administrative Tribunal directing the Railways to consider the respondent for appointment in Group D cadre under the special recruitment for members of Scheduled Caste community. 2. We have heard learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Railways and learned counsel appearing for the respondent. 3. Admittedly, the respondent is a member of Scheduled Caste community and she was a casual employee in the Railways from 21/10/1980 to 20/07/1981. On 18/04/1995, a notification was published by the Railways for special recruitment to fill up posts available for members of Scheduled Caste community in the Group D cadre. The respondent’s case before the CAT was that inspite of submission of application pursuant to the notification dated 18/04/1995 and all documents to prove community, age and casual employment in the Railways, the Railways did not respond to the OP(CAT) No.1176/2011 2 application. However, another lady by name Smt.P.V.Vasanthi was appointed in the same cadre who according to the respondent was junior to her as casual employee in the Railways. The O.A. filed by the respondent before the CAT was allowed. Before us, the contention raised by the Railways’ Standing Counsel is that there is no proof about employment of the above said Smt.Vasanthi as a casual employee and according to the Railways, she was recruited in 2003 as a Track Woman. We do not think there is any need for the Railways to contest this issue at this stage because the respondent’s eligibility for appointment in the Group D cadre in the vacancy available to members of Scheduled Caste community cannot be disputed. We, therefore, uphold that part of the order of the Tribunal directing the Railways to consider the respondent for appointment and if vacancy is there to appoint her within three months. However, after making appointment, if the Railways finds that Smt.Vasanthi above referred was not a casual employee and was not appointed by virtue of casual employment the Railesays can state so in the appointment order, so that if the respondent has a case to the contrary and has evidence she can OP(CAT) No.1176/2011 3 take up the matter in contempt proceedings before the CAT. This OP(CAT) is dismissed but with the above observations. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE) (K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE) jg