Allowed

V.R.Pradapkumar, v. Union of India

Madras HC15 Jul 2019WP/16179/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court allowed writ petitions filed by promotion instances to have adhoc promotions cancelled by a Railway officer. The Court held that the Central Administrative Tribunal's dismissal of similar earlier petitions without independent consideration rendered the current orders unsustainable. It quashed the Tribunal's order and remanded the matter for fresh consideration.

What did the court decide?

The orders dated 16.12.2016 and 01.02.2017 of the Tribunal were set aside. The Original Applications were remitted to the Tribunal for fresh consideration and disposal within three months.

V.R.Pradapkumar, Vs Union of India — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 15.07.2019

¶2

CORUM

¶3

THE HONOURNABLE MR.JUSTICE K.K.SASIDHARAN and THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE P.T.ASHA W.P.Nos.16179 to 16181 of 2018 and W.M.P.Nos.19265, 19266 & 19277 of 2018

¶4

V.R.Pradapkumar Protocal Inspector with lien in MAS Dn., Mech.Branch Office of the Chief Administrative Officer(Construction), Southern railway, E.V.R.Salai, Egmore, Chennai - 600 008.

¶5

..Petitioner in W.P.No.16179/2018 C.Kalappan (Rtd. Works Mistry, under CAO/O/CN/MS) No.3/46-A, Anna Street, Annai Indira Nagar, Shanmugapuram, Chennai - 600 099 ..Petitioner in W.P.No.16180/2018 T.T.Soundararajan, (Rtd. Sr.Telephone Operator, under CAO/O/CN/MS) Plot No.7, G-II, DTC Colony, Nanganallur, Chennai - 600 061 ..Petitioner in W.P.No.16181/2018

¶6

Vs. 1. Union of India, rep. by the General Manager, Southern Railway Park Town, Chennai - 600 003. 2. The Chief Personnel Officer, Southern Railway, Park Town, chennai - 600 008. 3. The Chief Administrative Officer, (Construction), Southern Railway,

¶7

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶8

EVR Salai, Egmore, Chennai - 600 008.

¶9

The Central Administrative Tribunal, represented by the Registrar, The Central Administrative Tribunal, Chennai - 600 104.

¶10

... Respondents in all the W.Ps.

¶11

Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records on the file of the 4th respondent/Central Administrative Tribunal relating to the orders made in O.A.No.685/2013 dated 16.12.2016, O.A.No.1806/2013 dated 16.12.2016 and M.A.No.547/2013 and O.A.No.310/01732/2013 dated 01.02.2017 respectively confirming the order of the 3rd respondent dated 05.05.20109 in Office Order No.87/2009 and to quash the same and to direct the respondents to restore the position of the petitioners before the proceedings dated 05.05.2009 by regularizing their service with all monetary and service benefits.

¶12

For Petitioners : Mr.Akhil Akbar Ali For Respondents : Mr.P.T.Ramkumar for R1 to R3 R4-Tribunal

¶13

The original applications filed by the petitioners herein challenging the order dated 05.05.2009 cancelling the multiple adhoc promotion given to them were dismissed by the Central Administrative Tribunal following the earlier order dated 26.06.2015 in O.A.No.1213/2012. The orders passed by the Tribunal are under challenge at the instance of the applicants in the Original Applications.

¶14

We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners. We have also heard the learned Standing Counsel for the Railways.

¶15

The challenge before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Madras Bench, was to the order passed by the Chief Administrative Officer (Construction), Southern Railway, cancelling the adhoc promotions given to the petitioners on the ground that such multiple adhoc promotions were not permissible under the Regulations. The Tribunal appears to have followed its earlier order dated 26.06.2015 in O.A.No.1213/2012 for non-suiting the petitioners. There was no independent consideration made by the Tribunal with regard to the contention taken by the

¶16

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶17

petitioners.

¶18

It is a matter of record that the order dated 26.06.2015 in O.A.No.1213/2013 was challenged before this Court in W.P.No.34931/2015. The writ petition filed by the applicant in O.A.No.1213/2012 was allowed by this Court by order dated 04.01.2017. The orders impugned herein were passed by the Tribunal well before the disposal of the writ petition, challenging the order in O.A.No.1213/2012.

¶19

Since there was an earlier order in O.A.No.1213/2012, there was no factual adjudication made by the Tribunal in the Original Applications filed by the petitioners. In view of the change of situation, meaning thereby, on account of the order passed by the High Court in W.P.No.34931/2015, we are of the view that the matter requires fresh consideration by the Central Administrative Tribunal.

¶20

The order dated 16.12.2016 in O.A.No.685 and 1806/2013 and the order dated 01.02.2017 in M.A.No.547/2013 & O.A.No.310/01732/2013 are set aside. The Original Applications are remitted to the Madras Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal for fresh consideration.

¶21

It is open to the parties to produce materials before the Tribunal to substantiate their respective contentions. The Tribunal shall consider the entire materials and pass orders on merits. Since the reply statements have already been filed on behalf of the respondents, we request the Tribunal to dispose of the Original Applications as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶22

The writ petitions are allowed as indicated above. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶23

Sd/Assistant Registrar(CS VI)

¶24

//True Copy//

¶25

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶26

vsi

¶27

¶28

The General Manager, Union of India,Southern Railway Park Town, Chennai - 600 003.

¶29

The Chief Personnel Officer, Southern Railway, Park Town,chennai - 600 008.

¶30

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶31

The Chief Administrative Officer, (Construction), Southern Railway, EVR Salai, Egmore, Chennai - 600 008.

¶32

The Registrar, Central Administrative Tribunal, Chennai - 600 104.

¶33

+1cc to Mr.P.T.Ramkumar , Advocate SR.No. 60040

¶34

+1cc to Mr.Akhil Akbar Ali Associates , Advocate SR.No. 60447

¶35

W.P.Nos.16179 to 16181 of 2018 A.SK(07/08/2019)

¶36

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

V.R.Pradapkumar, v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

V.R.Pradapkumar, v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Secretary (Forest and Vs The Registrar

The District Treasury Officer Vs M.Velmurugan

The Secretary Vs D.Ashok Kumar

M.Kannappa Chettiyar Vs State Human Rights Commission, Tamil Nadu

R.Anurajan Vs Government of India

Union of India Vs the Central Administrative