1

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL BENCH

Original Application No.180/00499/18 & M.A 180/680/2018

Tuesday, this the 19th day of June, 2018 CORAM:

Hon'ble Mr.U.Sarathchandran, Judicial Member Hon'ble Mr.E.K.Bharat Bhushan, Administrative Member

1. N.Arun Babu, S/o.R.Nanu, Arun Nivas Manchalloor, .P.O,

2. N.Ajith Kumar, S/o.Nanu, Arun Nivas Manchalloor, Pathanapuram P.O, Kollam

3. N.Archanadevi, D/o.R.Nanu, Arun Nivas Manchalloor, Pathanapuram.P.O, Kollam

4. Priyamol T.V, D/o.Vasudevan, Charuvilamelethil Pulamon P.O,

5. Pradeepkumar.T.V, S/o.C.Vasudevan, Charuvilamelethil, Pulamon P.O Kottarakkara

6. Sureshkumar.A., S/o.K.Appu, Charuvila Veedu, Kuttichira, P.O, Kollam

7. Sindhu, D/o.M.Vijayan, Charuvila Veedu Kuttichira, Kallumthazham P.O, Kollam

8. Kiran.K.Krishnan S/o.K.Krishnan Kutty Thankamma Bhavan, Hari Srinagar 104, AKG Junction East Kuravanpalam, Kollam

9. Kishore K.Krishnankutty S/o.K.Krishnankutty Thankamma Bhavan, Hari Srinagar 104 AKG Junction, East Kuravanpalam, Kollam

10. Sunitha C.S, D/o.T.K.Sadanandan Railway. Qrs. No.5, Ambalapuzha P.O Alleppy 2

11. Remya Babu, D/o.N.Babu, Nandanam Near Pandarakulam, TKMC Post, Kollam – 5

12. Sasikumar, S/o.M.Vijanan, Ajayabhavan Vayalil Purayidom, Jawahar Nager , Kollam

13. Nikhil N.K S/o.Y.Kunjumon, Pazhayathoppil Veedu Umbernadu, ,

14. Sonulal, S/o.K.Thankappan, Sonumandiram East, Poovattoor P.O P.O, Kottarakkara

15. Jyothishkumar, S/o.K.Sasi, Deepavilasam Thonikadavu, Karyara P.O,

16. Rajani.S, D/o.N.Babu, Nandanam Near Pandarakulam, Karicodu, TKMC P.O, Kollam

17 Ranjini.S, D/o.N.Babu, Nandanam Near Pandarakulam, Karicodu, TKMC P.O, Kollam

18. S.Deepakumari, D/o.K.Sasi, Deepavilasam Thonikadavu, Karyara P.O, Punalur

19. Savitha Viswan, D/o.Viswan, Paduvayal Kuluthungal Chengannoor P.O, Mallappally

20. Binalekshmi, D/o. Balachandran, Deepavilasam Thonikadavu, Karyara P.O, Punalur

21. Bineesh.V., S/o.Viswambaran Bhavitha Nivas, Venga,

22. Arun K.Krishnan, S/o.K.Krishnankutty Thankamma Bhavan, Harisri Nagar 104, AKG Junction, East Kuravan Palam Kollam ….. Applicants

(By Advocate – Mr.C.Rajendran)

V e r s u s

1. Government of represented by Secretary Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhavan, New Delhi-110 001 3

2. The Divisional Manager, Southern Railway Divisional Head Quarters, Division Thiruvananthapuram 695 014 ..... Respondents

(By Advocate – Mr.Sunil Jacob Jose)

This application having been heard on 12.6.2018, the Tribunal on

19.6.2018 delivered the following:

O R D E R

Per: Hon'ble Mr.U.Sarathchandran, Judicial Member

Heard Mr.Raghuthaman.R, Advocate representing Mr.C.Rajendran, learned counsel for the applicants. Mr.Sunil Jacob Jose takes notice on behalf of the respondents.

2. Applicants, 22 in number, have approached this Tribunal seeking relief as under:

“i. To call for the records leading to Annexure A6 and set aside it. ii. To give a direction to the respondents not to fill all the vacancies pursuant to Annexure A6 and keep the vacancies earmarked for the SC/ST candidates vacant so as to enable the applicants to get appointments in Group d Posts under the respondents

iii. To give a direction to the respondents to take immediate steps to fill the vacancies earmarked for the candidates belonging to Scheduled Cast and Scheduled Tribe as per Annexure A5.

iv. To fix the date of upper age limit for employment as the date on which the first vacancy arose among the vacancies.

v. To grant such other relief's prayed for in the interest of justice. ”

3. Applicants state that they are the wards of retired Railway employees who have served the Railway for about 30 to 40 years. According to them though there are vacancies of Class-IV employees under respondent no.2, no effort has been made by respondent no.2 for filling up the vacancies which are meant for members of Scheduled Caste. They are further aggrieved by the decision of the 4 respondents to re-engage retired Railway employees below the age of 62 years.

4. At the time of admission hearing we have heard Shri.Raghuthaman.R,

Advocate representing Shri.C.Rajendran, learned counsel for the applicants.

Shri.Raghuthaman submitted that the applicants have approached this Tribunal since the Hon'ble High Court has held in a Writ Petition filed as a public interest litigation with similar reliefs that it is purely a service matter. A copy of the judgment of Hon'ble High Court of in Writ Petition No.36168 of 2017 dated

10.11.2017 also has been produced.

5. We note that in the above said Writ Petition, the petitioners before the

Hon'ble High Court were Railway Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes

Pensioners Association represented by its Secretary R Nanu whereas the present Original Application has been filed by a group of people who are stated to be the wards of retired Railway employees. We wish to observe at the outset that when the pensioners seek some relief from their erstwhile employer pertaining to their service, their grievances can certainly be termed as a service matter.

6 In the instant case, applicants are not pensioners. They are stated to be the wards of retired Railway employees aspiring for employment in the posts reserved for members of Scheduled Castes. There is no employer -employee relationship between them and the respondents. There is nothing to indicate that the applicants have any service dispute with the respondents either. Section 14 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) which governs the power and jurisdiction of this Tribunal provides as follows:

“14. Jurisdiction, powers and authority of the Central Administrative Tribunal.— (1) Save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, the Central Administrative Tribunal shall exercise, on and from the appointed day, all the jurisdiction, powers and authority exercisable immediately before that day by all courts (except the Supreme Court 39 [***] in relation to— (a) recruitment, and matters concerning recruitment, to any All-India Service or to any civil service of the Union or a 5

civil post under the Union or to a post connected with defence or in the defence services, being, in either case, a post filled by a civilian; (b) all service matters concerning— (i) a member of any All-India Service; or (ii) a person [not being a member of an All-India Service or a person referred to in clause (c)] appointed to any civil service of the Union or any civil post under the Union; or (iii) a civilian [not being a member of an All-India Service or a person referred to in clause (c)] appointed to any defence services or a post connected with defence, and pertaining to the service of such member, person or civilian, in connection with the affairs of the Union or of any State or of any local or other authority within the territory of India or under the control of the Government of India or of any corporation 40 [or society] owned or controlled by the Government; (c) all service matters pertaining to service in connection with the affairs of the Union concerning a person appointed to any service or post referred to in sub-clause (ii) or sub-clause (iii) of clause (b), being a person whose services have been placed by a State Government or any local or other authority or any corporation 40 [or society] or other body, at the disposal of the Central Government for such appointment. 40 [Explanation.—For the removal of doubts, it is hereby declared that references to “Union” in this sub-section shall be construed as including references also to a Union territory.]

2......

3...... ”

7. The term 'service matters' has been given a meaning under Section

3(q) as follows:-

“

(q) “service matters”, in relation to a person, means all matters relating to the conditions of his service in connection with the affairs of the Union or of any State or of any local or other authority within the territory of India or under the control of the Government of India, or, as the case may be, of any corporation 7[or society] owned or controlled by the Government, as respects — (i) remuneration (including allowances), pension and other retirement benefits; (ii) tenure including confirmation, seniority, promotion, reversion, premature retirement and superannuation; (iii) leave of any kind; (iv) disciplinary matters; or (v) any other matter whatsoever; ” 6

8. The 'service rules as to redressal of grievances' has been defined in

Section 3(r). It reads:

“

(r) “service rules as to redressal of grievances”, in relation to any matter, means the rules, regulations, orders or other instruments or arrangements as in force for the time being with respect to redressal, otherwise than under this Act, of any grievances in relation to such matters; 7[(rr) “society” means a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860, (21 of 1860) or under any corresponding law for the time being in force in a State;] “

9. Section 19(1) of the Act deals with the applications made to the

Tribunal:

“19. Applications to Tribunals.—

(1) Subject to the other provisions of this Act, a person aggrieved by any order pertaining to any matter within the jurisdiction of a Tribunal may make an application to the Tribunal for the redressal of his grievance. Explanation.—For the purposes of this sub-section, “order” means an order made—

(a) by the Government or a local or other authority within the territory of India or under the control of the Government of India or by any corporation 45 [or society] owned or controlled by the Government; or

(b) by an officer, committee or other body or agency of the Government or a local or other authority or corporation 45 [or society] referred to in clause (a).

(2) Every application under sub-section (1) shall be in such form and be accompanied by such documents or other evidence and by such fee (if any, not exceeding one hundred rupees) 46 [in respect of the filing of such application and by such other fees for the service or execution of processes, as may be prescribed by the Central Government].

47 [(3) On receipt of an application under sub-section (1), the Tribunal shall, if satisfied after such inquiry as it may deem necessary, that the application is a fit case for adjudication or trial by it, admit such application; but where the Tribunal is not so satisfied, it may summarily reject the application after recording its reasons.]

(4) Where an application has been admitted by a Tribunal under sub-section (3), every proceeding under the relevant service rules as to redressal of grievances in relation to the subject-matter of 7

such application pending immediately before such admission shall abate and save as otherwise directed by the Tribunal, no appeal or representation in relation to such matter shall thereafter be entertained under such rules. ”

(Bolding supplied)

10. Thus on a combined reading of Section 14 and 19 read with the definition clauses in the Act, it can be seen that the pleadings in the present

Original Application filed by the applicants do not indicate any 'service matter' pertaining to them because the applicants are neither having any employment in service nor have they been discharged or not considered for appointment when they applied for a post. No specific pleadings in that regard also are seen. The applicants can not be said to be 'persons aggrieved by any order' either.

11 In District Collector & Chairman, Vizianagaram Social Welfare

Residential School Society, Vizianagaram and another v. M.Tripura Sundari

Devi (1990) 3SCC 655 it was held by the Apex Court that a person cannot be aggrieved if the persons have not applied for the post nor did they have the qualifications or better qualifications than the appointees. A similar view has been taken by the Apex Court in Bhanu Prathap v. State of Haryana and

Ors reported in AIR 2011 SC 3272. In that case it was held by the Apex

Court that only the aggrieved persons have locus standi. As the applicants herein cannot be stated to be aggrieved persons in relation to their service matter, they have no locus standi to approach this Tribunal in relation to the grievances stated in this Original Application. In the circumstance, we feel that the Original Application needs to be summarily rejected as it does not disclose any grievance relating to the service matters of the applicants. 8

12. Therefore, we reject the Original Application at the admission stage itself. In view of the above order, M.A 180/00680/2018 for joining together has become infructuous and hence it is closed.

(E.K.BHARAT BHUSHAN) (U.SARATHCHANDRAN) ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER sv List of Annexures

Annexure A-1 - A true copy of the letter dated 12.7.2016

Annexure A-2 - A true copy of the representation dated 8.3.2017

Annexure A-3 - True copy of the reply dated 18.8.2016 along with the number of vacancies

Annexure A-4 - True copy of the reply dated 21.10.2016

Annexure A-5 - The relevant provision of the recruitment rules

Annexure A-6 - True copy of the notification issued by 2nd respondent dated 11.2.2018

Annexure A-7 - A true copy of the list of SC candidates given appointment . . . . .