IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE V. ESWARAIAH AND THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE P. SWAROOP REDDY WRIT PETITION No.16133 OF 1999 Between: 1. The General Manager, South Central Railway, Rail Nilayam, SECUNDERABAD - 500 071 2 The Chief Personnel Officer, South Central Railway, Rail Nilayam, SECUNDERABAD - 500 071 3 The Chief Workshop Manager, Carrage Repair Shop, Tirupati, Chittoor Distirct - 517 506 ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 K. Venkataramana Reddy, S/o. Ponnuswamy Reddy, Settipalli Village, Tirupathi, Chittoor District - 517 506 2 V. Ashok Kumar, C/o. C.Viswanathan, Carriage Repair Shop Quarters, Settipalli Village, Tirupathi - 517 506 3 B. Mohammd Asif, S/o. Abdul Wahab, 2nd Block-A West Colony, Settipalli Post, Tirupathi - 517 506 4 N. Nagesh, S/o. A.Nagarajan, 110, CRS Quarters, West Colony, Settipalli Post, Tirupathi - 517 506 5 Syed Khaja Hussaian, S/o. Dastagiri Saheb, 102/B, CRS Railway Quarters, Settipalli, West Colony, Tirupathi - 517 506 6 Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench at Hyderabad, 1st Floor, HACA Bhavan, Opp.Public Garden, Hyderabad - 500 004. ( R6 is not necessary party to this Writ Petition) .....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 issue a writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or Direction to set aside the order of Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench in O.A.No.462 if 1996 if 27.8.98 and pass Counsel for the Petitioners : MR. R.S. MURTHY Counsel for the Respondent No. : ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice V. Eswaraiah) Respondent Nos.1 to 5 herein filed O.A. No.462 of 1996 on the file of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad to finalise the selection process on the basis of the Employment Notice No.1/91 dated 17-06-1991, which was issued for recruitment of 40 Artisan Khalasis in the scale of pay of Rs.750-940/-. The Tribunal by order dated 27-08-1998 disposed of the O.A. with the following direction: “If the substitutes who were screened on 12-9-95 and absorbed were actually in position on the crucial date when the applicants were interviewed then that number of substitutes appointed can be deducted from the 40 vacancies for filling up. If the substitutes were engaged later, then the respondents cannot regularise them when the regularly selected candidates for which panel is yet to be published is available for engaging them as substitutes or regular. In that case, all the 40 vacancies are to be filled by the candidates who are selected in pursuance of the Employment Notice No.1/91. In that case the panel should be published now and action taken accordingly. It may be possible that there may not be any vacancy to absorb the candidates now. In that case the panel should be kept alive till such time all the candidates selected as per Employment Notice No.1/91 is exhausted.” Aggrieved of the order of the Tribunal, this writ petition is filed by the petitioners to set aside the same. It is the case of the Railways, the petitioners herein, that Carriage Repair Shop was set up at Tirupati during 1987 to cater the needs of the South Central Railway with regard to the repairs, renovation and proper upkeep of the carriages of the entire zone. The sanctioned establishment of the shop was 643 artisans and 161 Group “D” staff in addition to several categories of ministerial, supervisory and non-technical staff. The monthly out turn is prescribed as 40 units initially and was increased from time to time and its out turn in May, 1993 was 70. It is stated that a decision was taken to fill up 40 Group ‘D’ posts in the scale of pay of Rs.750-940 (RSRP) and accordingly a requisition was placed on the District Employment Office, Employment Exchange, Chittoor on 12-06-1991 and on the same day, a requisition was also sent to the Zilla Sainik Adhikari, District Sainik Welfare Board, Chittoor for the purpose of filling of 8 vacancies reserved for ex-servicemen. Accordingly, Employment Notice No.1/91 dated 17-06-1991 was circulated among the employees and displayed it at the notice board of the office with an intimation to the Secretaries of the Service Associations. About 206 candidates have been considered by the Selection Committee in October, 1991 constituted for that purpose and accordingly recommended 39 candidates for appointment to Group ‘D’ posts, but the list of the selected candidates has not been announced. No offer of appointments could be issued to the recommended candidates having regard to the ban on filling up Group ‘D’ posts imposed by the Railway Board by its letter dated 26-09-1991. The Railway Board by its letter bearing No.E(NG)II/91/RR-1/21/S.C.Rly. dated 16-03-1993 not approved the filling of Group ‘D’ posts for Tirupati Carriage Repair Shop, but directed that vacancies may be filled up by redeployment from the surplus manpower from the other locations. The said letter bearing No.E(NG)II/91/RR-1/21/S.C.Rly., dated 16-03-1993, taking a decision for redeployment of the surplus manpower from the other locations in respect of 40 artisan khalasis in Group ‘D’ for Tirupati Carriage Repair Work Shop was not at all questioned before the Central Administrative Tribunal. It is further stated that as per the directions of the Railway Board, 40 vacancies have been filled up exclusively by the persons from the open market during the period from 09-12-1993 to 14-02-1995 as a temporary measure with a specific understanding that it is not an offer to any regular Group ‘D’ posts. The candidates selected earlier could not be considered to fill up these vacancies as they are appointed as a temporary measure. The selection process including the list is vitiated due to the inclusion of wards of Railway employees in the absence of any specific approval of this policy from the Railway Board. It is stated that the substitutes appointed against the said vacancies from 09-12-1993 to 14-02-1995 have been continued in the public service without reference to the candidates recommended earlier, as there was no scope to give effect to the said recommendations. It is stated that the respondents herein never questioned the action of the Railway Recruitment Board with regard to substituted appointments and they were not made parties before the Central Administrative Tribunal. It is stated that the substitutes appointed in the above vacancies were regularized during December 1993 to February 1995. Admittedly, the selection process was not notified and selected list was not published. It is the case of the petitioners that the recruitment notification vide Employment Notice No.1/91 dated 17-06-1991 and the letter of the Railway Board vide Lr.No.E(NG)II/91/RR-1/21/S.C.Rly., dated 16-03-1993, for filling up the vacancies by redeployment of surplus manpower from the other locations, shall stand cancelled as the selection process was not completed and it was never approved by the authorities. In spite of service of notice on the respondents, none appeared on heir behalf. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. The order of the Central Administrative Tribunal is not specific and it is vague, as such, this Court while admitting the writ petition suspended the said order on 02-08-1999. In the circumstances, we are of the opinion that at this juncture i.e. after lapse of ten (10) years, as there is no response, in spite of service of notice, from the respondents and in view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances and the subsequent events that have been taken place, the order of the Tribunal cannot be sustained and the writ petition is liable to be allowed. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 27-08-1998 in O.A. No.462 of 1996 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal is set aside. No order as to costs. ______________________ V. ESWARAIAH, J June 16, 2009. ______________________ P. SWAROOP REDDY, J PV