PRATIBHA BANERJEE, J. - (1.) These three applications have been taken out under Sec. 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985. The issues to be decided in these three applications are identical and as such, these three applications can be disposed of by a single judgement.
(2.) In O.A. No.768 of 1990, the applicant Shri Baidyanath Mondal alleges that he had worked as a casual labourer for the period from 2.1.71 to 31.12.71 (Annexure -B to the application) i.e. more than 120 days. Thereafter, he was disengaged. There were two Notifications by C.L.W. in the Gazette dated July, 1980 and December, 1980 as follows - If any person having worked as a casual labourer in the past and presently out of employment due to break in service because of non -availability of work approaches the appropriate Railway Authority his record should be checked and at the opportunity of next recruitment for casual labour work, he should naturally be given preference over his juniors. There was also Serial Circular No. 7684/GMA/Ruling/174 dt. 24.2.72 issued for granting other benefits to the persons falling in the same category as the applicant himself. It is an admitted position that no steps were take by Baidyanath Mondal pursuant to these notifications.
(3.) Thereafter, another Advertisement No. D/2/85 dt. 18.12.85 was issued and about 500 persons junior to him were appointed. According to the applicant Baidyanath Mondal, all these appointments are discriminatory and violative of the provisions of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. It is also admitted position that from 1985 to 1989 he did not move in the matter.;