- (1.)THIS is a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution by one Anil Kumar and by it he seeks to question the legality of an order passed by respondent 2, General Manager, Northern Railway, whereby respondent 4 Chain Singh was placed above him in the seniority list of charge-men in the grade of Rs. 280-350 P. S. 335--425 A. 8.--vide Ex. 6 on the record. He has prayed for an appropriate writ, order or direction against the respondents.
(2.)IT is common ground between the parties that the petitioner Anil Kumar entered the service of the railway as an apprentice mechanic on 17 August. 1948, he completed his training period of five years as an apprentice mechanic in 1953 and was absorbed as chargeman in the grade of Rs. 100--185 per mensem from 17 August 1953; that he was appointed as chargeman in the grade of Rs. 205--280 A. S. from 16 December 1955, that he was confirmed as chargeman in the grade of Rs. 205--280 A. S. on 28 October 1959, that he was promoted as chargeman in the higher grade of Rs. 250--380 A. S. pending selection on 11 August 1959, and that he was promoted as chargeman in the scale of Rs. 335--425 A. S. in officiating capacity with effect from 14 August 1962. Likewise it is common case of the parties that Chain Singh, respondent 4, entered the railway service as an apprentice mechanic on 28 December 1918, that he completed his training on 27 December 1953, that he was absorbed as draftsman in the grade of Rs. 100--185 P. S. from 28 December 1953, that he was appointed as junior instructor (chargeman) from 10 March 1956, that he was not confirmed as chargeman, that he was promoted in officiating capacity as chargeman in the scale of Rs. 250--380 A. S. on 25 January 1960. The parties are taking different positions on the question of their relative seniority. This has resulted from the fact that the petitioner was allowed to appear before the selection board for promotion to the higher grade in the year 1959 and though in the first attempt the petitioner was not able to pass the test, he passed the second test in the year 1960 and he was then allowed to continue as chargeman in higher grade in officiating capacity. Respondent 4, Chain Bingh, on the other hand, was not sent up before the selection board at the time the petitioner was sent, but he was sent up for selection in the year 1964. Chain Singh passed the test in the first attempt in 1964.
(3.)IT is in this context that the railway administration took up the question of fixation of seniority of Chain Singh in the higher grade of chargemen. The railway administration considered the representation of Chain Singh and on 30 September 1964, passed the following order : The representation of Chain Singh, chargeman, against the recast seniority list of chargemen (L. P. C. and T. S.) A. . S. Rs. 250--380 circulated--vide the office letter of even number, dated 29 June 1964 has been examined and it has been decided that he may be placed between Madhukant and Suraj Frakash, items 26 and 27 of that seniority lists. Consequent upon the above other action in the recast seniority list of chargemen (L. F. C. and T. S.) A. S. Rs. 250-880 the position of Chain Singh in the recast seniority list of chargemen (L. F. C. and T. S.) A. S. Rs. 335- 425 circulated--vide this office letter of even number, dated 26 December 1964, has been changed and he has now been placed between Madhukant and Suraj Frakash, items 25 and 26 of the seniority list of chargemen, Rs. 260-350 P. /335-425 A. S. Chain Singh be informed accordingly.
;