Sambuddha Chakrabarti, J. - (1.) Except four, the petitioners, 97 in number, were employees of the Railways in terms of Section 10 of the Railway Protection Force Act, (the Act, for short). Those who have been excepted are the sons and daughters of the ex-employees who were similarly posted as the other petitioners. The case of the petitioners in short is that there was a general railway strike in the year 1974 when the Railway Board to get over the consequential effects thereof issued a circular assuring the railway employees that their children would be provided with employment assistance in the railways as loyal workers if they restrained themselves from participating in the general railway strike.
(2.) The petitioners further contend that in view of the assurance given by the Railway Board the petitioners along with other railway employees did not participate in the general strike and helped the railway administration in smooth running of the railways and protected the interest of the nation. Children of a few loyal workers who did not participate in the said strike were provided with employment in different divisions of the Indian Railways. But the petitioners could not avail themselves of the opportunity as their sons and daughters were minors or they had actually no sons and daughters during that period. But, the petitioners claimed, they are entitled to the benefit of employment assistance as loyal workers on the basis of the said circular of the Railway Board.
(3.) A circular was issued on January 28, 1976, addressing all the General Managers of the railways wherein it was provided that the recruitment of the sons and daughters of the loyal staff should be continued till March 31, 1976 to finalize the pending cases received prior to December 31, 1975.;