- (1.) Petitioner was appointed as Khalasi on 11.11.1982. For promotion on the post of 'Blacksmith' against two vacancies and 'Hammerman', one vacancy, applications were called from eligible persons and a Trade Test was held on 21.4.1990. Petitioner applied for promotion on the post of 'Blacksmith' in the pay scale of Rs.950-1500/-. Result of Trade Test was declared on 29.5.1990. Divisional Railway Manager promoted one Naushey on the post of 'Blacksmith' and Gyan Singh on the post of 'Hammerman'. Since there were two vacancies notified in the cadre of 'Blacksmith', petitioner awaited for his promotion for some time and thereafter made a representation on 12.12.1990 requesting respondent competent authority to promote him against existing vacancy of 'Blacksmith'. When no order was passed, petitioner filed Original Application No.1469 of 1993, which was disposed of vide order dated 6.12.1993, directing respondent competent authority to decide representation of petitioner by a reasoned and speaking order within three months.
(2.) Pursuant to aforesaid order of Tribunal dated 6.12.1993, Divisional Superintending Engineer (III) Northern Railway, Allahabad (hereinafter referred to as 'the DSE') communicated his decision on petitioner's representation vide order dated 7.9.1994, stating that Trade Test conducted on 21.4.1990 was never approved by competent authority i.e. Senior Divisional Engineer (I) Allahabad. Record of Trade Test was seized by Vigilance Department. Assistant Engineer, Northern Railway, Etawah sent select list of Trade Test for approval to competent authority on 14.8.1991 but after scrutiny Senior Divisional Engineer did not approve selection pursuant to Trade Test and cancelled the same vide letter dated 13.9.1991. Thus on the basis of Trade Test held in 1990, petitioner cannot be promoted.
(3.) The order dated 7.9.1994 as also non promotion of petitioner was assailed in Original Application No. 1702 of 1994. Tribunal vide judgment and order dated 5.7.2001 has dismissed Original Application and there against Review Application No. 64 of 2001 preferred by petitioner has also been dismissed vide order dated 28.8.2001. Hence this writ petition.;