-1- Civil Writ Petition No.10983-CAT of 2003. IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ... Date of Decision: April 09,2008. Union of India and others ... Petitioner VERSUS Kapil Sharma and another ... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHINDER PAL. 1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ? Present: Mr. P.K. Dutt, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. R.K. Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No.1. -.- MOHINDER PAL, J. In this petition filed under Articles 226 / 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have prayed for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari, thereby quashing the order dated October 09, 2002 passed by the Central Administrative -2- Civil Writ Petition No.10983-CAT of 2003. Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as `the Tribunal') whereby Original Application No.277-HR/2000 filed by Kapil Sharma (respondent No.1) under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as `the Act'), was allowed. The facts, in brief, are that respondent No.1 was selected as Traffic Apprentice by the Railway Recruitment Board, Chandigarh. He was sent for training along with other selected candidates to the Training School at Chandausi. After completion of training, respondent No.1 was posted as Section Controller out of the four Streams i.e Station Master, Traffic Inspector, Yard Master and Station Controller. It is the case of the petitioners that once an appointment is made in a particular Stream, it cannot be changed by an officer lower than the rank of Head of the Department concerned for prescribed reasons. However, in violation of the relevant mandatory provisions, the Divisional Personnel Officer, on an alleged representation dated August 19, 1993, made by respondent No.1, changed his Stream from Section Controller to Yard Master vide order dated November 01, 1993 (Annexure P-8). Thereafter, vide order dated April 06, 2000 (Annexure P-11), the Stream of respondent No.1 was changed and he was posted as Section Controller, to which Stream he was originally appointed. Respondent No.1 challenged this action of the petitioner – Department before the Tribunal. His prayer was allowed. Hence this writ petition by the petitioner-Department. -3- Civil Writ Petition No.10983-CAT of 2003. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, we do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned order in exercise of writ jurisdiction of this Court. Vide order dated May 03, 2000, the Tribunal had ordered the petitioner-Department to maintain status quo qua respondent No.1 as it existed on that day. This order continued till the passing of the impugned order dated October 09, 2000. As stated above, respondent No.1 was posted in the Stream of Yard Master vide order dated November 01, 1993 (Annexure P-8). On July 28, 2003, when this writ petition was admitted to hearing, it was specifically stated that there shall be no stay on the operation of the impugned order passed by the Tribunal. Respondent No.1 is, thus, continuing in his present posting for the last more than fourteen years. The Tribunal after appraising the pleadings of the parties, arrived at a well- reasoned conclusion that as respondent No.1 was selected for a particular job in the pay scale of Rs.1600-2660, the petitioner- Department could not appoint him in the scale of Rs.1400-2600l. In fact, the petitioner-Department had committed a mistake by appointing respondent No.1 in a lower scale of pay in the category for which he was apparently not selected or even not applied for. It has been further held by the Tribunal that under the Rules, posts of Traffic Apprentices include the posts of Section Controller and three other categories i.e Station Master, Traffic Inspector and Yard Master, which are in the higher pay scale than that of Section Controller. Post of -4- Civil Writ Petition No.10983-CAT of 2003. Section Controller carries the pay scale of Rs.1400-2600 whereas the post of Yard Master, held by respondent No.1, carries the pay scale of Rs.1600-2660. Persons who were lower in merit than respondent No.1, were appointed in the scale of Rs.1600- 2660. Therefore, respondent No.1 was rightly given the stream of Yard Master vide order dated November 01, 1993. Resultantly, this writ petition is dismissed being without any merit. ( HEMANT GUPTA ) ( MOHINDER PAL ) JUDGE JUDGE April 09, 2008. ak