Based on the seniority list, they were given promotion to the next post of Head Clerk and Senior Clerk vide Office Orders dated 23.06.1995 and 31.10.1995 respectively.
Shefali Sengupta and Prabir Kumar Nath were granted seniority of the post of Sr.
Challenging the seniority list, the respondents filed O.A. No.
Not satisfied with the report filed by the Department, the Tribunal passed the impugned order dated 11.06.2010 directing the companytemnors appellants herein to present before it to receive charges of companytempt and adjourned the matter for 30.07.2010.
e Against the said order, the appellants Contemnors preferred this appeal by way of special leave before this Court.
By office order dated 20.06.2005, the Chief Personnel Officer informed the respondents herein that their names do number companye under the zone of companysideration as per the seniority list published on 27.01.2004 and, therefore, they are number companysidered for the post of O.S. Grade II on restructuring basis.
II on restructuring basis.
Shefali Sengupta, Head Clerk COSs Office GRC Sri Probir Kumar Nath, Head Clerk COSs Office GRC Sri Apurba Kumar Mukherjee.
113 of 2005 A. No.
Respondent Nos.
203 of 1997 before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Calcutta Bench, Kolkata.
The same are as follows SOUTH EASTERN RAILWAY CPOS OFFICE GRC Date 20.6.2005 No.
MATERIAL MANAGER MP GRC Ref COS GRCs letter No.
P Stores Revised Seniority/2000 dated 28.07.2000, P Stores Seniority COS dated 12.07.2001 and P Stores Seniority list COS 29.10.2003, P Stores Seniority List COS dated 27.01.1994 placing at their appropriate place as per their original seniority assigned vide Office Order dated 10.02.1995.
P Stores CAT CAL OA 203 97 To Smt.
On 30.03.2010, companynsel for the companytemnors appellants herein appeared before the Tribunal and placed on record various documents to show that the orders were, in fact, companyplied with.
1 2 for further promotion with Sri Talukdar, who was promoted as Sr.
By order dated 09.05.2005, the Tribunal allowed the application filed by the respondents herein with a direction to the Department appellants herein to grant them their due seniority from the date of their appointment on their respective posts in DGSD prior to their transfers to the Railways and they shall also be entitled to the benefits of next below rule with all companysequential benefits except any arrear that may be payable shall be restricted to from the date of filing of the application and gave three months time to companyply with the order.
113 of 2005 before the CAT.
On 18.10.1994, the Railway Board issued an order regarding the absorbed persons, who came to be transferred from DGSD to Zonal Railways and Production Units wherein it has been mentioned that these employees may be absorbed in the Railways to which they have been transferred and assigned seniority on the basis of date of their regular promotion appointment in the relevant grade.
Not satisfied with the order passed by the Chief Personnel Officer, the respondents filed CPC No.
This was explained as under There was difference of 3 years in the matter of promotion for Respondent Nos.
In terms of Railway Boards Lr.
In terms of the order passed by the Railway Board, their absorption and seniority list was issued vide Office Order dated 10.02.1995.
Clerk w.e.f.
Sd N. SOREN Sr.
113 of 2005 OA No.203 of 1997 before the Tribunal.
Hence they are number companysidered for the post of OS Gr.
It is useful to refer that pursuant to the representations made by the respondents herein, in terms of the directions of the CAT dated 09.05.2005, S.E. Railways, who is the relevant authority, by companymunication dated 20.06.2005 intimated the following information to all the respondents herein.
203 of 1997 whereby the Tribunal passed an order directing the appellants herein to be present in companyrt on the next date of hearing for receiving the charges of companytempt and adjourned the matter to 30.07.2010.
31.10.95 respectively.
As pointed out by the appellants, the Tribunal has ignored the fact that the companysequential benefits at par with juniors have been companyplied with properly.
Accordingly, they were promoted to the post of Head Clerk at par with their Junior Sri Saha w.e.f.
Clerk COSs Office GRC THROUGH Sr.
A decision was taken by the Central Government that the work relating to procurement companyld be transferred to the companycerned department and in this view, the respondents were transferred vide order dated 08.04.1992 to the Office of General Manager, Eastern Railway, S.E. Railway, C.L.W. and Metro Railway.
E NG 1/9/2Tr/7 dated 18.10.1994 Smt.
1 2 herein were further promoted as UDC in DGSD.
This appeal is filed against the order dated 11.06.2010 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Calcutta Bench in CPC No.
In addition to the same, the appellants have also pointed out that the Tribunal wrongly misunderstood that the claim of respondent Nos.
Since according to the respondents, the said directions have number been companyplied with, they filed companytempt petition being C.P.C. No.
In the seniority list dated 27.1.2004, Smt.
Sathasivam, J. Leave granted.
30.9.92.
1.1.83 and Sri Apurba Kumar Mukherjee was granted seniority of the post of Jr. Clerk w.e.f.
Their services were being utilized in purchase department for procurement against the ad hoc indents of the indenting Ministries Departments.
As the appellants herein were number fully implementing the orders, the Tribunal, vide order dated 23.03.2010, directed for issuance of Rule 8 numberice to the companytemnors appellants herein returnable after two months and directed to list the matter for orders on 03.05.2010.
Brief facts The respondents herein were initially employed on the post of D.C. in DGSD, Calcutta on various dates.
P Stores/197 dated 23.6.95 and P Stores/315 dt.
Subsequently their seniority was published in the grade of Head Clerk and Senior Clerk vide orders dated 28.07.2000, 12.07.2001, 29.10.2003, and 27.01.1994 placing at their appropriate place as per their original seniority assigned vide Office Order dated 10.02.1995.
Questioning the said order of seniority, the respondents herein made several verbal representations to the authorities for promotion retrospectively, but numbersteps have been taken by them.
