- (1.) THE posts of Passenger Guards, which were advertised were filled up on 28.6.2006. The petitioner subsequently became eligible, because of the subsequent event of rectification of seniority.
(2.) THE posts which were not advertised for the selection in question i.e. future vacancies could not be directed to be filled up on the basis of the selection in question, as is well settled by the law laid down by the Supreme Court. The other option i.e. reverting one of the promoted candidates, who as a result of rectification of seniority done on 7.11.2006, for accommodating the petitioner on the promotional post, was also not possible because no such person had been impleaded as a respondent before the Central Administrative Tribunal.
(3.) IN the circumstances, the selection result declared on 28.6.2006 as a result of which promotion to the posts of Passenger Guards took place, could not have been upset by the Central Administrative Tribunal in the proceedings as drafted by the petitioner, merely because of the subsequent alteration of the petitioner's seniority on 7.11.2006.;