Other Railway Administrations also have similar workshops.
The respondent authorities, more particularly, the respondent Nos.
Accordingly, treatment of this order in Eastern Railway has to be essentially different from that of the other Railways.
By an order dated 28.10.1991, it was directed The existing staff of Mech.
Elect.
As numbericed hereinbefore, writ petitions preferred thereagainst by appellant were dismissed by the High Court.
But a bare perusal of the record clearly indicates that actually it is number so.
It was, therefore, impermissible for the appellant to treat the workers similarly situated, differently.
For rescinding and revoking the order dated 14.7.1985 Annexure B to the petition for transferring petitioner Nos.1, 2 and 11 from Time Officer to clerical side.
Deptt.
In the above said letter of Railway Board dated 28.7.2000, it has been indicated that pattern of recruitment of the Time Keepers in Eastern Railway differs from the pattern prevalent in other Railways.
1.1.1996 instead of 18.2.2000 and extend all companysequential financial and other benefits in favour of the applicants within a period of three months from the date of companymunication of this order along with arrears.
5 and 6 are directed to fix the pay scale of the applicants as per 5th Pay Commissions recommendation for the post of Time Keeping Cadre w.e.f.
The judgment of the Central Administrative Tribunal dated 5.7.1991 in TA No.1585 of 1986 has been numbericed by us.
To pass an order of injunction restraining the respondents from transferring petitioner Nos.1, 2 and 11 from Time Office to the clerical side.
It was directed In view of above, the Railway Boards circular dated 18.2.2000 Annexure A/11 and order dated 28.7.2000 Annexure A/10 quashed set aside.
The extent of the benefit which has been extended to the and CLW, Chittaranjan Annexure A/14 w.e.f 1.1.1996 and also the letter of the Chief Personnel Officer Admn dated 13.7.2000 Grades of S.E. Railway as well as DLW, Varanasi and CLW, Chittaranjan should also be extended in favour of the applicants which are also similarly situated persons and working as Time Keeper in the Liluah Workshop of Eastern Railway.
The said recommendations were enforced as regards clerical staff with effect from 1.1.1996.
By an office order dated 18.2.2000, the Railway Board directed implementation of the said revised pay with effect from 18.2.2000, in the case of respondents, stating The Ministry have numbered that the pattern of recruitment of Time Keepers in Eastern Railway differs from the pattern prevalent elsewhere.
It is made clear that we are number inclined to say anything as to the payment of interest.
Therein, the Tribunal directed the workmen of the workshops at Liluah and elsewhere to be treated at par with their companynterparts of Kharagpur, Banaras and Chittaranjan locomotive workshop.
B. Sinha, J. Leave granted.
Eastern Railway Administration of Union of India is before us aggrieved by and dissatisfied with a judgment and order dated 20.4.2005 passed by a Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court in WPCT No.365 of 2004 and WPCT No.840 of 2004 dismissing the writ petitions filed by appellants from a judgment and order dated 3.6.2004 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal in Original Application No.1254 of 2000 and 10th February 2004 passed by the Tribunal in Original Application No.1458 of 1997.
Respondents were appointed as Time Keepers in different workshops belonging to the Eastern Railway Administration.
