- (1.) This writ petition is directed against the award of the Respondent No. 2 dated 12-12-1988 by which a direction was given to the Petitioner that the services of one Raghunath Prasad, a workman of the Respondent No. 1 Union, should be regularised with effect from 8-3-1974 and he should be given tie benefit of service from 9-3-1974. as Typist. The facts relevant for the decision of this writ petition are Section out hereunder.
(2.) The workman was a member of the Respondent No. 1 Union. The Respondent No. 1 espoused his cause before the Central Government, Ministry of Labour who vide their notification dated 9-8-1987 referred the following question for decision of the Respondent No. 2 : Whether the action of the management of Dy. C.M.E. Northern Railway in not regularising the services of Sri Raghunath Prasad, Typist and not giving him seniority w.e.f. March, 1971, is justified ? if not, to what benefits the workman concerned is entitled.
(3.) The workman's case was that he was appointed as a open on 27-1-1955. He is said to have been promoted to the post of English Typist on 9-3-1971 and was being paid incentive of Rs. 20/- per month. The workman alleged that the Genral Manager had directed by his letter dated 17-10-1983 the Divisional Raily Manager Lucknow to regularise the services of the enquiry and Reservation clerks, who had worked on adhoc basis for three years upto 6-7-1983. It was alleged that on the same principle the services of the employees was to be regularised with effect from 9-.3-1974 and the workman was to declared senior to some other workman. The Petitioner's defence before the Labour Court was that the workman was promoted as a Typist purely on adhoc basis on a purely temporary arrangement pending proper selection by the competent authority but the post of typist was said to be a selection post. The Petitioner further stated in their defence that the workman had appeared in the speed test on 22-6-1976 but he could, not qualify. He is again said to have appeared in the Hindi typing test on 11-8-1978 but he failed to qualify again. He is said to have appeared in the test for the third time on 15-11-1981 but was declared unsuccessful. A, test was notified by the Divisional Railway Manager for the post of typisi on 12-7-1985. The same was postponed because the workman had obtained a stay order and he was continued on adhoc basis purely under a local arrangement. The Railway Board is said to have issued a circular on 9-7-1982 that normal rules for promotion had to be followed for selection and regularisatios of adhoc promotion. In 1985 again a circular was issued by the Railway Board in which it was clarified that a person, who is officiating on adhoc basis on promotion can be reverted without assaigning any reasons if he fails to qualify in the selection. The departmental selection test was necessarily to be cleared and it was not sufficient to clear the examination of Hindi typing classes, which were opened by the Railways to impart training to those, who were interested in learning Hindi Typing The workman's case before the Tribunal seems to have been that on account of his long tenure as a typist on adhoc basis, he was to be regularised. It was contended by the workman that he was deliberately failed in the test.;