Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/5722/2001 4/ 4 JUDGMENT
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 5722 of 2001
With
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 3552 of 2001
For
Approval and Signature:
HONOURABLE
MS. JUSTICE R.M.DOSHIT
&
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE K.M.THAKER
=========================================================
1
Whether
Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?
2
To
be referred to the Reporter or not ?
3
Whether
their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?
4
Whether
this case involves a substantial question of law as to the
interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order
made thereunder ?
5
Whether
it is to be circulated to civil judge ?
=========================================================
UNION
OF INDIA & 2 - Petitioner(s)
Versus
RK
RAVAL & 2 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
: [Special Civil Application No. 5722 of 2001]
MR
RM VIN with for Petitioners
MR RAJESH R DEWAL for Respondent(s) :
1 - 2.
MR MAGANLAL PARMAR for Respondent(s) : 3,
Appearance
: [Special Civil Application No. 3552 of 2001]
MR
KK SHAH for Petitioners
MS
MEGHA JANI for Respondent No.1
MR UM SHASTRI for Respondent-2
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MS. JUSTICE R.M.DOSHIT
and
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE K.M.THAKER 14th November, 2008
ORAL
ORDER
(Per :
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE R.M. DOSHIT)
The writ
petitioners in above Special Civil Application No. 5722 of 2001
are the Union of India and Western Railways. The said petitioners
have challenged the judgment and order dated 30th April,
2001 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ahmedabad
[hereinafter referred to as, the Tribunal ] in
Original Application No. 125 of 1993.
The writ
petitioners in above Special Civil Application No. 3552 of 2001 are
the employees of the Western Railways. They have challenged the
common judgment and order dated 30th April, 2001 passed by
the Tribunal in Original Applications Nos. 555 of 1995; 567 of 1995;
568 of 1995 and 593 of 1995. The subject matter in both these
petitions is identical.
The
applicants before the Tribunal were the employees of the Western
Railways. In the year 1991, with the computerization, the Western
Railways required competent staff to man the Computer Reservation
Centers. Applications were invited from the existing staff of the
Western Railways. Accordingly, the above referred employees had
applied for appointment in the Computer Reservation Centers. The said
employees were given training. After receiving training, they were
posted in the cadre of Enquiry-cum-Reservation Clerks [hereinafter
referred to as the ECRC ] in the
pay-scale of Rs. 1400-2300. After serving as such for sometime, in
the year 1993, the Western Railways decided to call upon the said
employees working in the ECRC cadre either to opt to continue in the
ECRC cadre or for repatriation to their parent cadre. It is this
decision of the Western Railways which was subject matter of
challenge before the Tribunal below. According to the applicants,
their appointment in the ECRC cadre was permanent and there was no
question of their opting for repatriation to their parent cadre.
According to the Western Railways, the appointment made in the year
1991 was officiating appointment until regular staff was
selected and employed.
It is not in
dispute that pending the applications before the Tribunal, the
applicants continued to serve in the ECRC cadre; and they have
continued to serve as such pending the present writ petitions
also. We are informed that some of the applicants have, upon reaching
the age of superannuation, retired from service.
In above view
of the matter, we are of the opinion that in view of passage of time,
the cause of action does not survive. As the applicants have served
in the ECRC cadre continuously since 1991, the question of their
repatriation to their parent cadre should not arise. The petitions
have become infructuous.
The petitions
are accordingly disposed of. Rule nisi issued in each
Application is discharged. The parties will bear their own
cost. It is clarified that the concerned employees will be treated
as employees in the ECRC cadre; they will not be repatriated to their
parent cadre and they will be entitled to benefits of continuous
service in the ECRC cadre.
Registry will
maintain copy of this Order in each petition.
{Miss R.M Doshit, J.}
{K.M Thaker, J.}
Prakash*
Top