Briefly stated the facts leading to the filing of these appeals are On 19th January 1971, some of the casual labourers were selected as Khalasis by the Selection Committee companystituted by the Railways.
Vijaya Kumari had opted for avenue as Khalasi on TRS pool and by order dated December 18, 1984, she was posted as Khalasi Helper in higher scale Rs.
1933 of 2000 before the Tribunal.
One K. Prabhakar Rao and others who were working as Class IV Khalasi, filed a Writ Application No.
210 290 with effect from April 1, 1981.
779 of 1986 filed by one K. Ch.
1547/99.
135 of 1986 filed by Prabhakar Rao and others in which it was held that the applicants therein were entitled to seniority from the date of temporary appointment and number from the date of regularization.
Again on 1st November 1993 the Tribunal in Original Application No.
On 27th October 1989, the Tribunal in Transfer Application No.
829 of 1991 held as under the seniority lists which were revised in regard to the appellants in various writ petitions transfer applications original applications have to be revised with regard to the employees who are similarly situated to the applicants in those seniority units so as to reckon their services for the purpose of seniority from the date on which temporary status was companyfirmed.
1679 of 2001 and directed the respondents to prepare a fresh seniority list on the basis of the judgment of this Court in the case of V. Kameshwari v. Union of India 1993 2 Suppl.
The appellants and similarly situated persons were promoted as Khalasis and from Khalasis to Khalasis Helper and Grade III Fitter, Grade II Fitter and Grade I Fitter and Master Craftsman MCM .
On the basis of this order, the final seniority list was prepared on 25th July 2000 which was challenged by the respondents other than the State in O.A, No.
1679/2001 based on the said revised seniority and companysequential declaration of the seniority list published earlier on 28th July 2000 to be held valid with all companysequential monetary benefits.
291/02 also stands disposed of in terms of the order passed in the main OAs.
SCC 407.
Underlining is ours Aggrieved by the aforesaid order of the Tribunal, the Union of India filed Writ Petitions in the High Court challenging the order of the Tribunal.
Venkayya and others directed the respondents therein to prepare the seniority list according to the dates when the applicants therein attained temporary status.
Those who were working as casual labourers in 1970 71 were given temporary status after companypletion of 180 days of companytinuous service.
By a final order dated 8th December 1983, a learned Single Judge of the High Court disposed of the Writ Application by directing the petitioners to submit their representations within one month from the date of that order and also directed the respondents to prepare final seniority list and publish the same within four months of receipt of the representations from them.
A seniority list was thereafter prepared on 31st August 2001 on the basis of the order of the Tribunal in O.A. No.
On an application for review of the aforesaid order dated 23rd September 1987, the Tribunal allowed the same on 2nd November 1987 and held that the petitioners to that review application were entitled to companynt their seniority from the date of granting them temporary status.
Aggrieved by the said orders, the present appellants have filed the Special Leave Petitions in this Court for which leave has been granted.
A seniority list was prepared on 6th March 1979.
1 and 2, it appears that Smt.
1547 of 1999 allowing the said application held that the fixation of seniority was to be from the date of grant of temporary status.
On 21st February 1989, the Tribunal allowed a Transfer Application No.
The official respondents are directed to prepare a fresh seniority list on the basis of the judgment of the Honble Supreme Court in Kameshwaris case reported in 1993 1 SLR 550 which is reiterated in O.A. No.
1679 of 2001 before the Tribunal and sought for quashing the same by declaring the seniority list as illegal and void and also for setting aside the companysequential Memos dated 27.9.2001 reverting downgrade revision of the promotion of the petitioners in O.A. No.
Underlining is ours In 1995, another provisional seniority list was prepared by the respondents.
4 in the order of merit and by virtue of seniority she would be entitled to be placed in the panel in the place of respondent No.
It, however, appears that Smt.
5917 of 1980 in the High Court challenging the aforesaid seniority list.
3 was promoted to the said post and her pay and seniority on that post shall be fixed on that basis.
K. Vijaya Kumari, who was senior to the appellant, was placed above her at Sl.
On 21st January 2003, the Tribunal allowed the Original Application No.
1933 of 2000 which was challenged by the appellants and their batch by way of O.A. No.
Tarun Chatterjee, J. Leave Granted This batch of appeal has been filed against the judgment passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh whereby the companymon order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad in short the Tribunal was clarified to the extent that such of the observations made by the Tribunal which went companytrary to the decision of this Court in V. Kameshwari v. Union of India 1993 2 Supp SCC 407, had to be ignored and the authorities shall only take, into companysideration the principles laid down by this Court and prepare the seniority list as directed.
Since Smt.
On 12th March 2001, in the said original application, the Tribunal directed the Government to prepare the seniority list on the basis of the date of entry into grade.
The judgment read The petitioners shall be permitted to submit their representations against the seniority list published on 6 3 1979, within a period of one month from today.
1933/2000 and also in accordance with the future clarificatory directions given by this Tribunal in O.A. No.
However, on 24th November 1999, the Tribunal in O.A. No.
Their names were placed in the panel for absorption as Khalasis as and when vacancies would arise.
The Tribunal held The impugned seniority list published on 31 8 2001 and companysequential memos and orders issued on 27 9 2001 and 28 9 2001 proposing to revert downgrade their seniority are hereby quashed.
From the additional affidavit dated February 7, 1992 filed on behalf of respondent Nos.
M.A. No.
