UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. versus MOTI LAL AND ORS.

Citation: [1996] 2 S.C.R. 727 · Decided: 15-02-1996 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K. RAMASWAMY, G.B. PATTANAIK · Disposal: Dismissed

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. 
A 
v. 
MOTi LAL AND ORS. 
FEBRUARY 15, 1996 
[K. RAMASWAMY AND G.B. PAITANAIK, JJ.] 
B 
SelVice Lllw : 
Railway-Class III post-Appointment of casual Mat~egularisation 
of-Orders by the central Administrative Tribunal-On appeal, held : it is not C 
pennissible to appoint a person directly as a mate and it is only a promotional 
post from Class W of Gangman and Keyman-Respondents did not acquire 
a right for regularisation as Mates on their mere continuance as casual Mate 
for a considerable period-Confennent of temporary status as Mate ipso facto 
does not entitle the person concemed for regular absorption as Mate-How-
ever it will be inequitable to require the respondents after 22 to 25 years of D 
selVice to be regularised against class W posts-Hence on equitable grounds 
the ultimate conclusions of the Tribunal not inte1f ered with. 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal Nos. 3619-24 
of 1996. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 29.1.94 of the Central Ad-
ministrative Tribunal, Allahabad in O.A.S. Nos. 874, 1606, 1788/92, 1029, 
1030-31 of 1993. 
E 
N.N. Goswami, AK. Srivastava, Arvind Kr. Sharma, for the Appel-
b~ 
F 
S.K. Dhaon, Shyam Sunder Sharma, Anis Suhrawardy, Mrs. 
Shamama Anis and Zalli Ahmed Khan for the Respondents. 
The following Order of the Court was delivered : 
G 
Delay condoned. 
Leave granted. 
These appeals by the Union of India are directed against the orders 
passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Allahabad directing the H 
727 
728 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
(1996) 2 S.C.R. 
A Railways 191thorities to absorb the respondents on regular basis as Mates. 
The respondents approached the Central Administrative Tribunal, 
Allahabad challenging the orders dated 18.2.93 and 11.6.93 passed by the 
Deputy Chief Engineer (Construction) Northern Railway regularising the 
B respondents in the post of Gangman in the grade of Rs. 775 to Rs. 1025 in 
class IV. It was alleged by the respondents that they had been directly 
appointed as casual Mate in class III post in Northern Railway and after 
continuously working for more than 120 days they acquired temporary 
status as mates. It was also averred that before conferring temporary status 
on them they were required to pass the trade test and in pursuance to the 
C directions of the Supreme Court in Ram Kumar's case (Writ Petition Nos. 
15863-15906 of 1984 disposed of on 2nd December 1987) they were con-
ferred to temporary status as mates and a seniority list had been drawn up. 
While they were so continuing, the two ii;n.pugned orders emanated 
regularising them against the post of Gangman in class IV. accordingly they 
D prayed 
before the Tribunal that the Railway Authorities should be 
directed to regularise them against the post of Mates. The appellants -
Railway Authorities took the stand. before the Tribunal that the post of 
Mate is a promotional post and can be filled on regular basis only by 
considering the employees from lower grade of Gangman/keyman/senior 
keyman. They did not dispute the fact that the respondents· were granted 
E temporary status against the post of Mates but contended that since the 
Gangman can only be promoted on regular basis to the post of Mate 
subject to his fitness and qualification the Authorities have regularised the 
respondents by the impugned order in the lowest post of Gangman. The 
Tribunal on consideration of the respective stand of the parties came to 
F 
the conclusion that since the respondents have worked all these year as 
Mate right from the inception it would not be appropriate to regularise 
them against the lower post as Gangman and accordingly directed that they 
be regularised against the post of Mate. It is this order of the Tribunal 
which is being assailed in these appeals. 
G 
Mr. Goswami, learned senior counsel appearing for the Union of 
India and other Railway Authorities contended that the conferment of the 
temporary status on a casual employee does not ipso facto entitle him to 
be regularised to the said post and, therefore, merely because the respon-
dents were given temporary status against the post of Mates the Tribunal 
H erred in law in directing their regularisation as Mates. He further con-
...
--
-
U.0.1. v. MOTI LAL 
729 
tended that under the Rules in railways a person has to be appointed in A 
the lowest of Gangman and from the said post the next promotional post 
is keyman and then senior keyman which are the posts in class IV and 
thereafter th

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.