- (1.) In the instant Rule, Railway Board's letter being No. E (NG) III- 78 RRI/13 dated 30th June, 1978 issued by the Deputy Director (Establishment), Railway Board and the Office Circular No. E 740/C/Resv/Com/Line (I) dated 21st June, 1978 issued by the Chief Personnel Officer, Eastern Railway for filling up the posts of Enquiry-cum-Reservation Clerks in the scale of Rs.330-560/- by women and the Employment Notice being No. 1./78 (ER) for recruitment of lady Enquiry-cum-Reservation Clerks and the Railway Board's Circular No. E (NG) 111-76/CD/40 dated Aug. 5, 1976 to the General Managers, all India Railways on the subject "Revitalising the cadre of Inquiry-cum-Reservation Clerks" are under challenge.
(2.) The petitioners in the instant Rule are Railway employees and all of them are at present working as Reservation Clerks at different booking offices - of the Eastern Railway in Calcutta namely at Fairlie Place Reservation Office, Howrah Station Reservation Office and Sealdab Station Reservation Office. The petitioner's case is that by a letter dated 29th Feb. 1964, the Railway authorities laid down the procedure for appointment to the post of Enquiry-cum-Reservation Clerks as also other posts in Reservation cadre. A copy of such letter of the Railwy Board dated 29th Feb. 1964 has been annexed to the writ petition being annexure 'A'. It appears that the Chief Personnel Officer, Eastern Railway, Calcutta on 7th Apr. 1978 issued a memo for formation of a panel for the post of Enquiry-cum-Reservation Clerk in the scale of Rs. 330-560/- (RS). By the aforesaid memo, staff eligible to be appointed as Enquiry-cum-Reservation Clerk in the said scale were advised to appear in a written test scheduled to be held on 23rd Apr. 1978. The petitioners contend that the petitioners volunteered to appear in the written test for their regular appointment in the post of Enquiry-cum-Reservation Clerk but for the reasons best known to the Railway administration, the proposed examination for formation of panel for the post of Enquiry-cum-Reservation Clerk was not held. Thereafter, on 28th June, 1978, the Chief Personnel Officer (Commercial) Eastern Railway issued a Circular being Circular No. 740/C/Resv/Com/Line (I) dated 21st June, 1978 for filling up the post of Enquiry-cum-Reservation Clerks in the scale of Rs. 330-560/- by women only. It appears from the said Circular that the Eastern Railway Administration had decided to fill up the posts of Enquiry-cum-Reservation Clerks in Fairlie Place Reservation Office, Calcutta by lady employees and lady employees alone and for that purpose volunteers among lady employees of all categories (Class III) from all offices in Calcutta area were called for absorption by screening. A copy of the said letter has also been annexed to the writ petition being annexure 'C' to the application. The petitioners contended that the said Circular dated 21st June, 1978 was neither bona fide nor lawful and the same was issued in violation of the rules prescribed for appointment to the post of Enquiry-cum-Reservation Clerk as per Board's letter dated 29th Feb. 1964. It is to be noted in this connection that in the said Circular calling lady employees of all categories for absorption by screening, no qualification whatsoever was laid down to enable a candidate to be eligible for such screening and for absorption and the petitioners contend that sex only was the criterion for such eligibility. The petitioners also challenged the legality and validity of the Railway Board's Circular No. E (NG) 63 PMI-52 to the General Managers, all India Railway regarding channel of promotion for Inquiry-cum-Reservation Clerks. The said Circular was annexed to the affidavit-in-opposition of the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 being annexure 'A' to the affidavit-in-opposition. It will appear from the said Circular of the Railway Board that 25% of the posts for Enquiry-cum-Reservation Clerks should be filled up by direct recruitment and women candidates if available should be favourably considered for absorption to the said cadre of Enquiry-cum-Reservation Clerks not only on promotion from other categories to the initial grade but also in the proposed direct recruitment quota. The petitioners further contend that such steps for filling up the posts of Enquiry-cum-Reservation Clerks by only women were taken on the basis of the statement made by the Hon'ble Railway Minister during his budget speech on 21st Feb.1978. The petitioners state that from the news item published in the Statesman on 22nd Feb. 1978 it appears that the Hon'ble Minister told the Lok Sabha that only women would be employed as Reservation or Booking Clerks and Supervisors in the major Railway Booking Offices on the ground that they were less prone to corruption. The actual extract of the speech of the Hon'ble Minister for Railways was, however, given in the affidavit-in-opposition on behalf of the Railway authorities and it appears from the said affidavit-in-opposition that the Railway Minister in his budget speech for the Railways stated before the Paliament on 21st Feb. 1978 to the following effect: "Steps have also been taken to curb corruption in reservation and streamline the procedure. As a part of the drive to root out malpractices in booking and reservation offices, I have decided that, as a matter of general policy, only women should be employed as reservation/booking clerks and Supervisors in major booking offices, starting with the metropolitan cities. We may be accused of being partial to the fair sex, but our experience has shown that the malpractices in reservations are comparatively less where women are employed at the counters". The petitioners contend that the authorities of the Eastern Railway are taking steps to recruit only women candidates for the posts of Enquiry-cum-Reservation Clerks and such action was being taken in violation of the provisions contained in Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. They also contend that the aforesaid illegal steps had been taken in order to implement the decision of the Hon'ble Minister for Railways to recruit only women candidates. The petitioners further contend that such decision was not taken by the Railway authorities out of their own accord but such decision was superimposed by the Hon'ble Minister and in order to give effect to the decision already taken by him, the subsequent Circulars by the Railway Board and by the Eastern Railway as stated hereinbefore had been issued. The Railway Administration however denied the contention that it was only to implement the decision of the Hon'ble Minister for Railways that the said steps to fill up the posts of Enquiry-cum-Reservation Clerks by women candidates only had been taken by the Railway administration. It was contended in the affidavit-in-opposition made by the Railway Board that the decision of the Railway administration to employ women only as Enquiry-cum-Reservation Clerks in four metropolitan cities is based on the following main reasons: (i) The Railway Administration had been receiving complaints from the public of irregularities and malpractices in cases of reservations and the Railway administration had been considering measures to be taken for removing; the cause of such public complaints. On an assessment of the situation on all India basis, it was found that such complaints were at the minimum in respect of reservations made from the Reservation Centre at Church Gate, Bombay of the Western Railway where Reservation counters are operated exclusively by women employees. It also appeared to the Railway Administration that the work of Enquiry-cum-Reservation Clerks includes public relationship job and women employees are more suitable to such job. (ii) Due to the nature of work involving the performance of duties at all hours of the day and night and the physical exertion involved, many field jobs of the Railways suit only men, and in the advertisements issued for such recruitment it is specifically stated that "women need not apply". To make up such allocation of the vast majority of jobs on Railways to men and having regard to the provisions of Art. 15 (3) of the Constitution and Art. 46 of the Directive Principles of State Policy as appearing in Part IV of the Constitution that the State shall promote with special care the economic interests of the weaker sections of the people, the Govt. had been considering whether certain jobs can be allocated to women. In the opinion of the Government, women are particularly suited for the work at the Reservation Offices which practically constitute reception centres for the travelling public. In all modern establishments, the reception centres are operated by women. The employment of women in the Railway Reservation Office in Metropolitan cities is in the nature of a "special provision for women" made by the State under Art. 15 (3) of the Constitution. The Railway Administration also contended that the decision to employ women candidates only in the reservation offices of the four Metropolitan cities viz. Calcutta, Madras, Bombay and Delhi did not emanate from the Railway Minister's Budget speech made on the 21st Feb. 1978. It was contended by the Railway Administration that a decision to re-organise the Reservation-cum-Booking Offices on the Indian Railways was under consideration even long before the Railway Minister had made his budget speech. The Railway Administration contended that organisation and reorganisation of Enquiry-cum-Reservation Centres on the Indian Railways are done independently by the Railway Administration from time to time for the administrative reasons of the Railway and also for the benefit of the travelling public. The category of Reservation Clerk was first introduced on April 1, 1956 and prior to that the Ticket Collectors and Commercial Clerks used to work in the Reservation Offices at Fairlie Place, Howrah Station and Sealdah Station in Calcutta. By the Railway Board's Circular dated 29th Feb. 1964 all reservation offices of the Zonal Railways were re-organised as separate cadre with effect from 1st April 1964 and the posts were made "Selection Posts". On 5th Aug., 1976 the Railway Board issued a Circular addressed to the General Managers, all Indian Railways on the subject "Revitalising the Cadre of Enquiry-cum-Reservation Clerks" and it was decided that the entire cadre should be headquarters controlled, 25% of the posts should be filled up by direct recruitment and women candidates should, if available, be favourably considered for absorption to the cadre of Enquiry-cum-Reservation Clerks not only on promotion from other categories to the initial grade but also in the proposed direct recruitment quota. On 28th April, 1978 the Railway Board issued a Circular addressed to the General Managers, all Indian Railways regarding employment of women as Reservation/Booking Clerks and Supervisors in the major Booking offices at Metropolitan cities. It was decided that as far as possible, women should be employed as Reservation/Booking Clerks and Supervisors in the major booking offices in the Metropolitan cities i. e. Bombay, Calcutta, Madras and Delhi which may be declared as a separate unit of promotion, if not already done. It was also provided in the said circular that the existing men in these offices should be replaced by women to the extent that women candidates are available both from serving staff and by direct recruitment. It was for this reason that on 21st June, 1978 the Chief Personnel Officer, Eastern Railway issued the said circular regarding employment of women as Reservation/Booking Clerks and Supervisors in the major Booking Offices at Metropolitan cities. It also appears from the amdavit-in-opposition of the Railway Administration that on 30th June 1978 the Railway Board issued a Circular No. E(NG) 111-78 RRI 13 giving direction to take action to implement the Railway Minister's decision of employment of women as Reservation/Booking Clerks in the Metropolitan cities. It was further stated that the male employees who volunteer to move out will be given full protection of the pay and grade both substantive and officiating in non-fortuitous arrangement. Subject to vacancies being available, they will be also be given choice of the place of posting and for implementing such decision the advertisement for recruitment of lady employees as Enquiry-cum-Reservation Clerks was also given.
(3.) The case was argued at length by the learned counsel appearing for both the parties and with the leave of the Court written arguments were also submitted on behalf of the both the parties. The petitioners contended that the points for decision involved in the instant Rule are: (a) Whether or not the State has at all any power to make a classification of citizens on the basis of sex with regard to matters of employment under the State. (b) Assuming that the State has such a power, whether or not there has been a bona fide exercise of that power which in its turn involves the consideration of reasonable nexus of the step taken, to the so-called objects sought to be achieved by the Railway Administration.;