Arun Palli, J. - (1.) THE petitioners have assailed the order dated 26.07.2002, Annexure P -4, passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh (for the sake of brevity and convenience be referred to as, 'the Tribunal') vide which the original application filed by the petitioners was dismissed. It is prayed that the orders, Annexures A -1/1 to A -1/3 attached with O.A., vide which respondents No. 4 to 9 have been made senior to the petitioners by following the wrong policy which was not applicable for regularizing the respondents No. 4 to 9 w.e.f. 10.08.1988, be quashed. And official respondents be directed to treat the petitioners senior to respondents No. 4 to 9 with all consequential benefits.
(2.) WE may at the outset notice a decision, which has a crucial bearing on the subject in issue. As per para 189 of IREM, Vol. I relating to promotion of Group C and D posts, a decision was taken by the General Manager, Northern Railway in a meeting held on 7th and 8th of May, 1987, contained in item No. 58 of 1986 of the PNM, which reads as thus: - "2. Item No. 53/86 -Cancellation of Selection for the post of Material Checking Clerk on Delhi Division. After discussing it was decided by the G.M. That all those staff who are working continuously as Material Checking Clerks on ad hoc basis for the period of three years or more may be regularized on the basis of their service record and Viva -voce duly observing the extent instructions on the subject as a special case not be quoted as a precedent in future. If there are still more vacancies after regularizing the said staff, as per para 1 above, to fill up these normal selection may be held and completed very early." The petitioners herein were appointed as Clerks on different dates. The necessary details, being extremely significant in context of the issue involved herein, vis   -vis their initial entry into service, subsequent promotion as ad hoc Clerks and their regularization as Clerks, are depicted hitherto below: - "Surinder Singh: Applicant No. 4: joined as Khalasi on 01.01.1981, promoted on ad hoc basis as Clerk on 22.08.1995 and regularized against rankers' quota on 08.10.1990 and joined as such on 02.01.1991; Suman Lata: Applicant No. 2: Appointed as a clerk by direct recruitment on 22.10.1989; Charanjit Singh: Applicant No. 3: Joined as Khalasi on 15.12.1979, promoted as Clerk on ad hoc basis on 03.04.1989, regularized against 33 -1/3% rankers' quota on 08.10.1990; Roshan Lal: Applicant No. 5: joined as Khalasi on 15.02.1982, promoted on regular basis against ranker's quota on 29.11.1990; Yogesh Kumar: Applicant No. 6: joined service on 20.12.1982 and regularized against ranker's quota on 08.10.1990; Ashok Kumar: Applicant No. 7: joined as Khalasi on 01.04.1981, promoted as Clerk on ad hoc basis on 22.11.1985 and regularized against ranker's quota on 08.10.1990; Ashwani Kumar: Applicant No. 8: joined as Clerk on compassionate grounds on 16.08.1988."
(3.) BRIEFLY the case set out by the petitioners, before the Tribunal, has been that the seniority list of Clerks was issued by the official respondents, wherein, the names of the petitioners were shown but names of the private respondents were not depicted since they had not been regularized. In fact, respondents No. 4 to 9 were promoted as Clerks on ad hoc basis (MCCs) on different dates in the years 1985, 1986 and 1987 but were not made regular as they had not completed three years' service in view of the aforesaid decision dated 7th and 8th of May, 1987. Clerks, who had completed three years' service were required to go through a viva voce test besides examination of their service record for being made regular. Respondents No. 4 to 9 happened to be working in Delhi Division before creation of Ambala Division and, thus, their promotions to the post of MCCs were made on ad hoc basis by the Delhi Division. They were later transferred to Ambala Division as ad hoc. The Administration, subsequently, issued another order dated 30.11.1995 (Annexure A -7 on record), which contained a scheme for regularization of Material Checking Clerks in the Ambala Division through viva voce. In a nutshell, the said decision clarified the previous decision dated 7th and 8th of May, 1987 and it was, accordingly, made clear that if any senior has been ignored while regularizing the services of the junior, he may also be considered for regularization. On the basis of the test conducted, vide order dated 24.10.1997 (Annexure A -8 on record), respondents No. 4 to 9 were declared successful in the viva voce tests and were, accordingly, brought on provisional panel. As a result of this, respondents No. 4 to 9 were made regular Clerks vide order dated 05.11.1997 (Annexure A -9 on record) with immediate effect, although, it was not mentioned in those orders that the said respondents would be given seniority above the petitioners. However, vide seniority list (Annexure A -1 on record), they had actually been placed above all the petitioners.;