-: 1 :- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 7189 OF 2004 WRIT PETITION NO. 7189 OF 2004 WRIT PETITION NO. 7189 OF 2004 Union of India, through General .. Petitioners. Union of India, through General .. Petitioners. Union of India, through General .. Petitioners. Manager, Central Railway, Mumbai Manager, Central Railway, Mumbai Manager, Central Railway, Mumbai CST and Ors. CST and Ors. CST and Ors. V/s. V/s. V/s. 1. B.G. Wagh & Others. .. Respondents. 1. B.G. Wagh & Others. .. Respondents. 1. B.G. Wagh & Others. .. Respondents. --- Mr. T.J. Pandian for the Petitioners. Mr. T.J. Pandian for the Petitioners. Mr. T.J. Pandian for the Petitioners. ----- ----- ----- CORAM : D.K. DESHMUKH AND CORAM : D.K. DESHMUKH AND CORAM : D.K. DESHMUKH AND N.D. DESHPANDE, JJ. N.D. DESHPANDE, JJ. N.D. DESHPANDE, JJ. DATED : 05TH JUNE, 2008. DATED : 05TH JUNE, 2008. DATED : 05TH JUNE, 2008. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: . We have heard the learned counsel for the . We have heard the learned counsel for the . We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners. The respondents are not appearing. We have petitioners. The respondents are not appearing. We have petitioners. The respondents are not appearing. We have perused the record. Admitted position is that the quota perused the record. Admitted position is that the quota perused the record. Admitted position is that the quota provided for promotion is 50% for the direct recruitment, provided for promotion is 50% for the direct recruitment, provided for promotion is 50% for the direct recruitment, 25% for departmental candidates and 25% for intermediate 25% for departmental candidates and 25% for intermediate 25% for departmental candidates and 25% for intermediate apprentice. Admittedly during the relevant year there apprentice. Admittedly during the relevant year there apprentice. Admittedly during the relevant year there were 14 vacancies and, therefore, only 7 vacancies could were 14 vacancies and, therefore, only 7 vacancies could were 14 vacancies and, therefore, only 7 vacancies could have been filled in by the department by direct have been filled in by the department by direct have been filled in by the department by direct recruitment. However, admittedly the department had recruitment. However, admittedly the department had recruitment. However, admittedly the department had filled in 8 vacancies by direct recruitment in the Diesel filled in 8 vacancies by direct recruitment in the Diesel filled in 8 vacancies by direct recruitment in the Diesel Transmission Trade. The departmental candidates felt Transmission Trade. The departmental candidates felt Transmission Trade. The departmental candidates felt aggrieved by that and had approached the tribunal. The aggrieved by that and had approached the tribunal. The aggrieved by that and had approached the tribunal. The tribunal by its order has held that since there were 14 tribunal by its order has held that since there were 14 tribunal by its order has held that since there were 14 -: 2 :- vacancies and that the direct recruitment quota was only vacancies and that the direct recruitment quota was only vacancies and that the direct recruitment quota was only 7 against the vacancies of that year, only 7 appointment 7 against the vacancies of that year, only 7 appointment 7 against the vacancies of that year, only 7 appointment could be made by the direct recruitment. However, it could be made by the direct recruitment. However, it could be made by the direct recruitment. However, it appears that there was a controversy before the tribunal appears that there was a controversy before the tribunal appears that there was a controversy before the tribunal whether quota rule would apply against the total number whether quota rule would apply against the total number whether quota rule would apply against the total number of posts available in the cadre or against the vacancies of posts available in the cadre or against the vacancies of posts available in the cadre or against the vacancies which arise during the recruitment year. There was which arise during the recruitment year. There was which arise during the recruitment year. There was difference of opinion between the two members of the difference of opinion between the two members of the difference of opinion between the two members of the Division Bench of the Administrative Tribunal. Division Bench of the Administrative Tribunal. Division Bench of the Administrative Tribunal. Therefore, matter was referred to the third member. The Therefore, matter was referred to the third member. The Therefore, matter was referred to the third member. The third member agree with the one member holding that the third member agree with the one member holding that the third member agree with the one member holding that the quota rule will apply to the vacancies in the recruitment quota rule will apply to the vacancies in the recruitment quota rule will apply to the vacancies in the recruitment year and not to the total number of posts available in year and not to the total number of posts available in year and not to the total number of posts available in the cadre. There is no dispute that the finding recorded the cadre. There is no dispute that the finding recorded the cadre. There is no dispute that the finding recorded by the majority that the quota rule is applicable to the by the majority that the quota rule is applicable to the by the majority that the quota rule is applicable to the vacancies available in the recruitment year, is correct. vacancies available in the recruitment year, is correct. vacancies available in the recruitment year, is correct. The only submission made by the learned counsel appearing The only submission made by the learned counsel appearing The only submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is that the departmental candidates for the petitioner is that the departmental candidates for the petitioner is that the departmental candidates were not adversely affected by the department action in were not adversely affected by the department action in were not adversely affected by the department action in filling up 8 posts by direct recruitment. In our filling up 8 posts by direct recruitment. In our filling up 8 posts by direct recruitment. In our opinion, the submission is not well founded because if in opinion, the submission is not well founded because if in opinion, the submission is not well founded because if in relation to the vacancies in the given year the quota relation to the vacancies in the given year the quota relation to the vacancies in the given year the quota rule is breached and persons in excess of the quota are rule is breached and persons in excess of the quota are rule is breached and persons in excess of the quota are appointed, then the persons who are entitled to be appointed, then the persons who are entitled to be appointed, then the persons who are entitled to be promoted against the remaining vacancies are bound to be promoted against the remaining vacancies are bound to be promoted against the remaining vacancies are bound to be adversely affected because one post would be less would adversely affected because one post would be less would adversely affected because one post would be less would -: 3 :- be available to such candidates. As we find that the be available to such candidates. As we find that the be available to such candidates. As we find that the tribunal has given elaborate reasons in its order which tribunal has given elaborate reasons in its order which tribunal has given elaborate reasons in its order which we find are in accordance with law, we see no reason to we find are in accordance with law, we see no reason to we find are in accordance with law, we see no reason to interfere with the order. Petition is dismissed. No interfere with the order. Petition is dismissed. No interfere with the order. Petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. order as to costs. order as to costs. (D.K.DESHMUKH, J.) (D.K.DESHMUKH, J.) (D.K.DESHMUKH, J.) (N.D.DESHPANDE,J.) (N.D.DESHPANDE,J.) (N.D.DESHPANDE,J.) ..... ..... .....