IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P.SWAROOP REDDY WRIT PETITION No.3804 of 2000 Between: M.Venkataramana D.No.18-14-4, Vadavapuram Kaikanada ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The General Manager South Central Railway Rail Nilayam Secunderabad 2 The Divisional Railway Manager South Central Railway Vijayawada 3 Senior Personnel Officer Divisional Office, Personal Branch SC.Railway, Vijayawada .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to call for the records relating to the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench in OA.No.1668/1998 Dt.3/11/1999 and issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction in the nature of the writ of mandamus declaring the impugned order Dt.3/11/1999 as illegal and unconstitutional and a consequential direction to the respondents to give me two notional promotions as Hamal Maistry and Market and to give consequential monetary benefits of arrears of salary to the petitioner and for re-fixation of the pension of the petitioner and pass such other order. Counsel for the Petitioner:MS.T.BALA JAYASRI Counsel for the Respondent : MR.R.S.MURTHY FOR R The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P.SWAROOP REDDY WRIT PETITION No.3804 of 2000 ORDER: (per the Hon’ble Sri Justice V. Eswaraiah) Petitioner questions the order, dated 03-11-1999, passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench, Hyderabad, in O.A.No.1668 of 1998, in not regularizing his services as Hamal Maistry from 20-10-1981 to 31-08-1990, on which date, he retired from service. It is stated that after transfer of regular Hamal Maistry, the post of Hamal Maistry was surrendered on 09-03-1982. It is stated that from the date of transfer of the regular Hamal Maistry, the petitioner performed the duties of Hamal Maistry as per the orders of the Chief Goods Supervisor. Admittedly, the Chief Goods Supervisor has no power or authority to utilize the services of the petitioner as Hamal Maistry and the Assistant Survey Officer, Vijayawada, is the competent authority to fill up the post of Hamal Maistry. Therefore, we are of the opinion that the Tribunal rightly dismissed the application of the petitioner holding that the competent authority has not approved or ratified the action of the Chief Goods Supervisor. Merely because the Chief Goods Supervisor addressed a letter to the Station Superintendent, it cannot be said that the petitioner is entitled for regularization as Hamal Maistry. But, however, the Tribunal directed the 3rd respondent herein to verify the records available and ascertain whether the petitioner had been paid O.T.A. for the period from 20-10-1981 to 09-03-1982, the date on which the post of Hamali Maistry was surrendered, during which period the petitioner appears to have worked as Hamal Maistry at Kakinada Port, if not already paid, the same shall be determined and paid expeditiously. We are not inclined to express any opinion with regard to the said direction, as the Railways have not questioned the said direction given by the Tribunal. Therefore, we do not see any infirmity in the impugned order, so as to call for interference by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. However, it is made clear that if the direction given at para 22 (a) of the impugned order is not implemented by the Railways, it is always open to the petitioner to take appropriate action to get it implemented in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________ V.ESWARAIAH, J _____________________ P.SWAROOP REDDY, J Date: 08-07-2009 Prv