It directed Respondents Nos.
891 of 1996 filed by the appellant herein.
1311 of 1999 filed by the Respondent Nos.
1 and 2 stated as follows In this selection, the roster points to be filled up for the two vacancies were point Nos.
The High Court allowed the Writ Petition and set aside the order of the Tribunal.
1 and 2 to empanel the appellant in the reserved category provided that she was qualified according to the marks and seniority in the selection made, and if there was numberSC candidate above her either on marks or in seniority.
3 had been selected on merits he should number be companysidered as occupying a Scheduled Caste seat.
1 and 2 filed Writ Petition No.
The Selection of Respondent No.
The O.A. filed by the appellant thus stood dismissed by the impugned judgment and order of the High Court.
The appellant also belongs to a Scheduled Caste and was of the view that the Respondent No.
2 and 3.
Being aggrieved by this judgment and order Respondent Nos.
The Tribunal therefore, allowed the O.A. by its order dated 27.11.1998.
1 and 2, and setting aside the order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal dated 27.11.1998 which had allowed the Original Application No.
The respondents Nos.
1311 of 1999 in the High Court of Madras.
3 Mr. M. Siddiah , was promoted to the post of Assistant Law Officer on his merit and number because he was a Scheduled Caste candidate.
The main stay of the argument of the appellant was, as stated earlier, that since Respondent No.
1 and 2 had denied this averment in para 10 of their additional reply before the Tribunal.
The Tribunal further directed that the appellant if found fit, will be deemed to be entitled to the seniority in the service from the date of selection of Respondent No.
She, therefore, filed the above referred O.A. in the Central Administrative Tribunal hereinafter referred to as Tribunal at Chennai.
Being aggrieved thereby, the appellant has filed the present appeal.
It declared that the selection of Respondent No.
3 was in an unreserved vacancy on his own merit.
However, since he had retired in the meanwhile, the emoluments received were directed number to be disturbed.
It was her companytention that instead of Respondent No.
3, though she will number get the salary till the date she actually assumed charge of the higher post.
4 Mr. K. Rajagopalan Nair belonging to the open category, she should have been promoted to the post of Assistant Law Officer on the basis of her status as a Scheduled Caste candidate.
1 and 2 filed their reply statement before the Tribunal and pointed out that as per the Railway Boards decision dated 29.7.1993 in small cadres having less than 4 posts, reservation had to be provided as per the 40 point roster when numberSC ST candidate was available in the Cadre.
Gokhale J. This appeal seeks to challenge the judgment and order dated 28.1.2003 rendered by the Madras High Court allowing Writ Petition No.
Accordingly, the promotion order for both of them was issued on 26.5.1995.
In para 1 2 of their reply the Respondent Nos.
She, therefore, represented to the Chairman of the Railway Board on 14.2.1996 but there was numberresponse.
