Employees are entitled to retrospective absorption from the date similarly situated persons were absorbed.

The four applicants were employees of the Southern Railway Headquarters Office Employee Stores, a quasi-administrative office.

Following a Railway Board decision on 30.05.2000 to absorb 50 such employees into Group ‘D’ posts, a list including the applicants was forwarded on 05.12.2001

The respondents initially deemed the applicants ineligible, leading to a legal challenge.

Though an initial OA was dismissed, the Hon'ble Madras High Court in W.P. No. 20416 of 2009 (order dated 15.10.2015) set aside the dismissal, ruled the applicants satisfied absorption conditions, and directed their absorption

Consequently, the applicants were absorbed on 30.10.2011. However, the applicants sought retrospective absorption effective from 05.12.2001, the date the initial list was submitted

The respondents rejected this representation via an order dated 14.11.2016, contending that the 2001 list was for scrutiny only and that absorption is prospective

1. Whether the applicants are entitled to retrospective absorption in Railway Service with effect from 05.12.2001, the date their names were first submitted for scrutiny

2. Whether the applicants are entitled to parity with similarly situated employees who were absorbed under the same scheme in 2008

The Tribunal applied the principle of parity and the doctrine of non-discrimination in public employment.

beneficial schemes for absorption should not be defeated by narrow or technical interpretations

while absorption is generally prospective, if a delay is caused by the employer’s illegal or erroneous actions, the employee may be entitled to parity with peers who were timely absorbed under the same scheme

The Tribunal observed that while the Madras High Court had previously determined the applicants satisfied the conditions for absorption, the applicants' demand for the 2001 date was unsustainable

The Tribunal noted that the 2001 list was a preliminary list forwarded to the Railway Board for scrutiny and did not constitute a final approval for appointment

The records revealed that other similarly situated employees, whose names were included in the same 2001 list, had been officially absorbed by the Railway Board on 15.10.2008

The Tribunal reasoned that while the applicants could not claim a 2001 date, they could not be penalized for the litigation delay caused by the respondents' initial refusal to absorb them. To ensure equity and parity, the Tribunal determined that the applicants must be placed on the same footing as their peers

The Tribunal directed the respondents to effect the applicants' absorption from 15.10.2008 and to implement this order within two months of receipt

No order was made as to costs