- (1.) IN Original Application No. 939 of 2008, Uma Shankar Saxena v. Union of India, the Central Administrative found that the ground that the photostat machine operator is ex -cadre post, cannot be accepted as reasonable and valid, because of the judgment in O.A. No. 1164 of 1998 dated 10.8.2004. In the said judgment the post of Photostat Machine Operate was not accepted to be ex -cadre post to which benefit of restructuring could not be allowed. No appeal was filed against the judgment. The claim of the applicant for restructuring of his post could not be rejected.
(2.) THE Tribunal further observed that as regards the post being isolated one, the plea of the applicant to rely on the Board's letter dated 12.7.1991 and subsequent letters/ circulars were acceptable. In the Board's D.O. letter dated 12.7.1991 it was clearly stated that the post of Photostat Machine Operator is an isolated one and on this basis the benefit of restructuring accrues to the applicant. The O.A. No. 1168 of 1998 was allowed by the Tribunal on 10.8.2004 and the impugned order dated 11.1.2008 was set aside. The competent authority was directed to consider the claim of the applicant in view of the observations made in the judgment. The Respondent No. 1 applied for execution. It appears that dates were fixed in the execution application and that proceedings for attachment were drawn. The Senior Divisional Personnel Officer, Izzat Nagar by Office Order No. 1651 also passed necessary orders in compliance with the order of the Tribunal dated 16.11.2010 against which review petition filed on 2 29.11.2010 was pending. We are informed that the review petition was dismissed.
(3.) IN the same order it was observed that Shri Uma Shankar Saxena, Photostat Machine Operator will be given benefit of restructuring operative from 1.3.1993 with the benefit of upgradation in the pay scale of Rs. 1200 -2040 subject to his complying the necessary conditions namely 3 years' satisfactory service records, confidential reports DRASPE, vigilance clearance and continuous one year's previous service. It is further stated in the last line that the orders will be subject to the legal proceedings that may be taken by the railway administration.;