Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2
PETITIONER:
SHRI SUNDER LAL & ORS.
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 03/09/1998
BENCH:
SUJATA V.MANOHAR, S.RAJENDRA BABU
ACT:
HEADNOTE:
JUDGMENT:
JUDGMENT
Sujata V. Monohar. J.
The appellants were initially appointed in the
service of the North Eastern Railway as carpenters.
However, on their passing trade test for carpenter and
wireman they were appointed as wiremen-cum-carpenters with
effect from 16.12.1968. As the category of
carpenter-cum-wireman was a non-standard category, the
North-Eastern railway authority decided to abolish this
category in 1978. Options were invited from the original
appellants who were six in number to opt either for the
carpenter’s category or wireman’s category. In 1979 the
appellants exercised their option for the category of
wireman. Thereafter they were posted as wiremen. However,
on account of problems which arose relating to the seniority
of the appellants qua the existing wiremen, the General
Manager of North-Eastern railway by issuing order dated
24.9.1984, decided to put the appellants in the category of
carpenter which was the category in which they were
initially appointed. Their names were removed from the
seniority list of wiremen.
The appellants had, in the meanwhile, in 1984 filed
a suit for a declaration that they were eligible to appear
for the test for promotion to the highly skilled wireman
Grade II posts. Since they were absorbed as wiremen. The
suit was decreed. The appeal which was transferred to the
Central Administrative Tribunal has been allowed and the
suit has been dismissed. The Tribunal has rightly come to
the conclusion that under paragraph 2011 of the Indian
Railway Establishment Code Volume II a competent authority
may transfer a railway servant from one post to another
provided that, except on account of inefficiency or
misbehaviour or on his written request, he shall not be
transferred to a post carrying less pay than the pay of the
post over which he holds a lien.
In the present case the posts of carpenter and
wireman are equivalent posts carrying the same pay and the
same terms and conditions of service. The post of carpenter
is also a post to which the appellants were originally
appointed. Now, on account of administrative reasons the
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2
appellants have been posted as carpenter instead of wiremen
when the category of carpenter-cum-wireman was proposed to
be abolished. We are also informed that out of the six
appellants two have been died and the other four have been
working as carpenter after the Tribunal’s order of
10.2.1987. Looking to all the circumstances of the present
case this is not a fit case for setting aside the decision
of the General Manager of 24.9.1984 when the appellants
continued to get the same pay in the same pay-scale and the
terms and conditions of service were not affected in any
manner.
The appeal is therefore, dismissed. There will,
however, be no orders as to costs.