Court allowed writ petition, setting aside C.A.T. order directing appointment under terminated LARSGESS scheme, relying on Supreme Court and Gauhati HC rulings upholding scheme termination as unconstitutional.
Impugned order dated 30.10.2018 passed by Tribunal in OA No.040/00273/2018 is set aside.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Page No.# 1/4
GAHC010020242019
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/802/2019
THE NORTH EAST FRONTIER RAILWAY AND 3 ORS. REP. BY THE GENERAL MANAGER, NORTH EAST FRONTIER RAILWAY, MALIGAON, GUWAHATI- 781011.
2: THE CHIEF PERSONAL OFFICE
NORTH EAST FRONTIER RAILWAY MALIGAON GUWAHATI- 781011.
3: THE DIVISIONAL RAILWAY MANAGER (P)
NORTH EAST FRONTIER RAILWAY LUMDING DIVISION
LUMDING PIN- 782447
4: THE DIVISIONAL COMMERCIAL MANAGER (P)
NORTH EAST FRONTIER RAILWAY GUWAHATI PIN - 781001
VERSUS
KALPANATH YADAV S/O LATE DALSINGAR YADAV RELIVING PORTIER
OFFICE OF THE SENIOR STATION MANAGER, GUWAHATI, DEPARTMENT OF TRAFFIC, LUMDING DIVISION, R/O RAILWAY QUARTER NO. DS/30/E, PANBAZAR RAILWAY COLONY, PIN-781001.
Page No.# 2/4
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR G GOSWAMI
Advocate for the Respondent : MR. A AHMED
BEFORE
HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA
ORDER (Oral)
10-01-2022
Sudhanshu Dhulia, C.J.
The matter is taken up through video conferencing.
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners challenging the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal dated 30.10.2018 by which the Original Application being, OA No.040/00273/2018 filed by the respondent herein was allowed and direction has been given that he should be appointed under the Liberalized Active Retirement Scheme for Guaranteed Employment for Safety Staff (LARSGESS).
Page No.# 3/4
Union of India thereafter had put on hold all appointments under the said scheme w.e.f. 27.10.2017 and thereafter, took a decision on 06.03.2019 not to appoint any person under the said scheme, which will be effective from 27.10.2017.
“ 6. The reliefs which have been sought in the present case, as already noted earlier, are for a writ of mandamus to the Union of India to appoint the petitioners in their respective cadres. A conscious decision has been taken by the Union of India to terminate the Scheme. This has been noticed in the order of this Court dated 6 March 2019, which has been extracted above. While taking this decision on 5 March 2019, the Union of India had stated that where wards had completed all formalities prior to 27 October 2017 (the date of termination of the Scheme) and were found fit, since the matter was pending consideration before this Court, further instructions would be issued in accordance with the directions of this Court. Noticing the above decision, this Court, in its order dated 6 March 2019, specifically observed that since the Scheme stands terminated and is no longer in existence, nothing further need be done in the matter. The Scheme provided for an avenue of a back door entry into the service of the railways. This would be fundamentally at odds with Article 16 of the Constitution. The Union government has with justification discontinued the scheme. The petitioners can 4 claim neither a vested right nor a legitimate expectation under such a Scheme. All claims based on the Scheme must now be closed.
7. In view of the above factual background, we are not inclined to entertain the petition under Article 32. The grant of reliefs to the petitioners would only enable them to seek a back door entry contrary to the orders of this Court. The
Page No.# 4/4
Union of India has correctly terminated the Scheme and that decision continues to stand.
8. Having regard to the above facts and circumstances, the petition is dismissed. A certified copy of this order shall be forwarded by the Registrar (Judicial) to the Chairman of the Railway Board for intimation and compliance.
The writ petition is disposed of in terms of the above order.
JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE
Comparing Assistant
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the impugned order of the Central Administrative Tribunal allowing appointment under the LARSGESS scheme should be set aside in light of the Supreme Court and High Court rulings terminating th
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Hon'ble Supreme Court orderFollowed¶31
WP(C) 78/2021
Gauhati High Court order dated 18.02.2021Followed¶37
WA 2744/2020
The North East Frontier Railway and 3 Ors.
Gauhati High Court (supra)
Kalpanath Yadav
Sudhanshu Dhulia
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
