IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI WEDNESDAY, THE 4TH JUNE 2008 / 14TH JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 21166 of 2004(S) -------------------------- OA.397/2001 of CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,ERNAKULAM BENCH .................... PETITIONER: ------------ 1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE GENERAL MANAGER, SOUTHERN RAILWAY, CHENNAI. 2. THE CHIEF PERSONNEL OFFICER, SOUTHERN RAILWAY, CHENNAI. 3. THE DIVISIONAL RAILWAY MANAGER, SOUTHERN RAILWAY, PALAKKAD DIVISION, PALAKKAD. 4. THE SENIOR DIVISIONAL PERSONNEL OFFICER, SOUTHERN RAILWAY, PALAKKAD DIVISION, PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.K.P.DANDAPANI (SR.) RESPONDENT: --------------- P.T.SASIDHARAN, ASSISTANT GUARD, SOUTHERN RAILWAY, SHORANUR. BY ADV. SRI.P.SANTHOSH KUMAR (PANAMPALLI NAGAR) & SRI.T.A.RAJAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX IN W.P.(C)No.21166/04 PETITIONER'S EXTS: EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF O.A.NO.397/01 DATED 26.4.01 ALONG WITH ANNEXURES FILED BY THE RESPONDENT AGAINST HIS REVERSION. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF REPLY STATEMENT DATED 15.10.2001 ALONG WITH ANNEXURES FILED BY THE PETITIONERS HEREIN TO O.A.NO.397/01. EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF ADDITIONAL REPLY STATEMENT DATED 13.10.2003 FILED BY THE PETITIONERS HEREIN TO O.A.NO.397/01. EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF REJOINDER DATED 22.10.03 ALONG WITH ANNEXURES TO REPLY STATEMENT FILED BY THE RESPONDENT HEREIN IN O.A.397/01. EXT.P5: TRUE COPY OF 2ND ADDITIONAL REPLY STATEMENT DATED 10.12.03 ALONG WITH ANNEXURES FILED BY THE PETITIONERS HEREIN IN O.A.NO.397/01. EXT.P6: TRUE COPY OF IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 20.1.2004 PASSED BY THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM IN O.A.NO.397/01. TRUE COPY K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & M.C.HARI RANI JJ. ----------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No.21166 OF 2004 ----------------------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 4th DAY OF JUNE, 2008 J U D G M E N T Balakrishnan Nair, J. The respondents in O.A.No.397/01 are the writ petitioners. The applicant is the respondent herein. 2. The applicant was Pointsman Grade-A. He underwent selection for the post of Assistant Guard. He came out successfully in the written test and viva voce. He was selected and appointed as Assistant Guard in 1996. Later, objections were filed by candidates who were not selected, pointing out various irregularities in the selection to that post. The competent authority found that the applicant was ineligible to get the marks for seniority. The minimum marks required for the written test to qualify for the viva voce was 60. He scored only 53 marks and when seven marks for seniority were added, he was held eligible for viva voce. The competent authority issued show cause notice to the applicant to revert him based on the above said finding. The applicant challenged that order by filing O.A.No.1222/97. The said original application was heard along with two O.As. in which selection to the post of Assistant Guard itself was impugned. Those three O.As. were heard and disposed of by a W.P.(C)No.21166/04 -2- common order dated 23.9.1999 directing the General Manager of the Southern Railway to consider the entire matter and take a fresh decision. In the case of the applicant, it was found by the General Manager that he was ineligible to get marks for seniority and therefore the selection was held to be bad. By proceedings dated 28.3.2001, a copy of which is produced in the O.A. as Annexure A11, the applicant was reverted. The present O.A., 397/01 was filed challenging that order. The contention of the applicant was that, the post of Assistant Guard is a post in the direct line of promotion as far as the post of Pointsman Grade-A is concerned and therefore he is entitled to get marks for the seniority also. 3. The writ petitioners resisted the said O.A. contending that the post of Assistant Guard is a general post to which appointments are made from various streams. Therefore, the applicant was ineligible to get marks for seniority. The Tribunal considered the rival contentions and upheld the stand of the applicant. For doing that, reliance was placed by the CAT on Annexure A12 which is the Avenue Chart for Assistant Guard. As per the Avenue Chart, as far as the Assistant Guard is concerned, the immediate lower posts are Cabinman Grade-I, Leverman Grade-I, Pointsman Grade-A and Gateman Grade-I in the scale of pay of Rs.950-1500. The scale of pay of Assistant Guard is also Rs.950-1500. Relying on Annexure A13 seniority list, the applicant submitted that the above said four posts are interchangeable and forms a common cadre. So, the next promotion post W.P.(C)No.21166/04 -3- for the above said categories of posts in the direct line of promotion is Assistant Guard, it was contended. 4. From the materials on record, it cannot be definitely found whether it is a general post or a post in the direct line of promotion. A plausible view has been taken by the Tribunal in this case. The applicant has been continuing in the post as Assistant Guard since 1996. Now he has been sent for training for promotion to the next higher post of Goods Guard. Since this Court did not grant any interim order while admitting the writ petition in 2004, the judgment in the O.A. was implemented also. In view of the above facts, we feel that it is not necessary for this Court to interfere with the order of the CAT, a copy of which is produced as Exhibit P6. But, it is clarified that the above decision of the CAT will not operate as a precedent as far as the writ petitioners are concerned. That means, in other cases, if the very same question arises, the petitioners will be free to urge their contentions. Subject to the above clarification, the writ petition is dismissed. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR,JUDGE. M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE. dsn