- (1.) We have heard Sri Amit Sthalekar, learned Counsel for the Petitioners in both the writ petitions and Sri Vikas Budhwar, learned Counsel appearing for private Respondents.
(2.) Counter and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged between the parties and with the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties, both the writ petitions are disposed of finally.
(3.) Brief facts of both the writ petitions need to be noted. The facts of Writ Petition No. 61166 of 2006, briefly noted, are; Railway Board decided to restructure certain posts of Group-C and Group-D and the circular dated 9th October, 2003 was issued for the purpose. Another circular dated 6th January, 2004 was issued providing that as an one time measure the existing selection procedure for selection is modified to the extent that selection shall be based only on the scrutiny of service record and confidential report without holding any written examination or viva voce. The exercise for filling up of various selection posts took place in the Diesel Locomotive Works, Varanasi. The selection proceedings, which took place prior to 20th February, 2004, empanelled even those candidates who had secured average grading in their confidential reports. However, the selection proceedings which took place after 20th February, 2004, i.e., on 24th, 25th and 27th February, 2004 did not include those candidates against the selection post who had secured average grading in their confidential reports. In the select list, which was prepared on the aforesaid dates, the Respondents No. 1 to 8, who were working as Assistant Engineer Grade-I, were promoted for the post of Section Engineer (In the scale of Rs. 6,500/-to 10,500/-). Several Assistant Engineers Grade-II, who were senior to Respondents No. 1 to 8 and were not included in the select list on the ground that they had secured average grading in their confidential reports, complained of their non selection and have also filed original application before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Allahabad. An order dated 16th February, 2005 was passed by the Railway Administrations cancelling the selection of Respondents No. 1 to 8. Original Application Nos. 169 of 2005, 181 of 2005 and 185 of 2005 were filed by Respondents No. 1 to 8 challenging the order dated 16th February, 2005. The Central Administrative Tribunal by its order dated 29th July, 2005 quashed the order dated 16th February, 2005 on the ground that the said order was passed without any opportunity to the Respondents. However, liberty was given by the Tribunal to the Railways to pass fresh order after giving notice. A show cause notice dated 9th August, 2005 was issued which was replied and thereafter by a detailed order dated 19th August, 2005 the representations of Respondents No. 1 to 8 were rejected and the selection of the Respondents held on 24th, 25th, and 27th February, 2004 was held to be illegal and they were reverted to their substantive posts. Aggrieved against the order dated 19th August, 2005 Original Application No. 1039 of 2005 was filed by Respondents No. 1 to 8, which has been allowed by the Tribunal by judgment and order dated 15th September, 2006. This writ petition has been filed by the Union of India and others challenging the order dated 15th September, 2006 of the Central Administrative Tribunal.;