DISHONOURING APEX COURT ORDERS JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS RULES LAW
seshadri vikrala
(Querist) 02 November 2017
This query is : Resolved
HONOURABLE SIR SENDING THIS MATTER WITH A GREAT EXPECTATIONS THAT YOU HAVE TIME TO READ IN SEQUENCE BUT NOT TO DISCARD PLEASE.
IN RAILWAY BOARD RPF THERE ARE TWO TYPES OF ENTRY INTO GROUP A CADRE SERVICE SELECTION PROCESS...
DIRECT UPSC SELECTION PROCESS AS ASSISTANT SECURITY COMMISSIONER,RPF, THEY GET THEIR NEXT HIGHER RANK PROMOTION ON COMPLETION OF THREE YEARS CONTINUOUS SERVICE AS ASC. REMAINING,EAR MARKED QUOTA, FIRST PHASE, THEY SELECT INSPECTORS TO ASC POST, KEEP QUITE ON DPCs, MAKE THEM AS AD HOC ASCs to work for several years. ACTUALLY
40/50% SELECTION PROCESS IS TO BE DONE THROUGH DPC/UPSC, WHICH IS DONE NOT BEING CARRIED OUT BY RAILWAY BOARD RPF AS PER PROVISIONS OF THE LAW,THE RULES, JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS, BUT THEY CONDUCT DPCs AT EASE AS PER THEIR CHOICE. IN RPF DIRECTORATE,DG,RPF IS FROM IPS CADRE SERVICE RANK OFFICERS ON DEPUTATION AND COULD NOT SUCCEEDED IN SET RIGHTING THE INSIDE VICIOUS CYCLE IN CONDUCTING DPCs IN TIME SCHEDULE BY TRYING TO GET FACTUAL INFORMATION ON RECORD... NOT A SOLUTION WAS SOLVED SO FAR AT HIS OPENNESS DIRECTIONS AND ORDERS SO FAR.. ALL CASES DECIDED BY COURT ORDERS ALSO NOT HONOURED EXCEPT ONE CASE WHEREIN, THEY IMPLEMENTED HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA IN THE WP FILED BY ONE BHUPATHI ALIAS B. MOHAN, THE SLP FILED BY THEM DISMISSED.. HEREIN THE CRUX OF THE LAW RULES AND SPECIFIC JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS COMES THROUGH.. THEY GAVE DEEMED PROFORMA, PRESUMPTIVE PROMOTION TO ALL RETIRED SA GRADE DSCs to DIG SCALE OFFICERS, EVEN THOUGH THEY ARE NOT PETITIONER S IN THE WP, LEAST ,THEY DID NOT EVEN APPLIED FOR DEEMED PROMOTION ORDERS AT PAR WITH JUNIORS BEFORE SUPERANNUATION, THEREBY, ALL THE RETIRED SA GRADE OFFICERS IN RPF WERE GIVEN PENSION FIXATION BENEFITS AT PAR WITH JUNIORS...HERE , THE SAME IS OUTRIGHTLY REJECTED BY RAILWAY BOARD RPF...
DEPARTMENT PROMULGATED RULES BUT ALMOST KEPT ASIDE IN THIS MATTER.
THEY GIVE PROMOTION TO INSPECTORS/GROUP A CADRE SERVICE RANK AS ASCs/GROUP A CADRE POST...JUNIOR ADMIN SCALE...NO GROUP B CADRE POST S IN RPF SINCE 1983...
THE ATTACHMENT OF LITIGATION IS THAT THE ADHOC SYSTEM CONTINUANCE GOES ON AND DEPARTMENTAL ASCs WITHOUT REGULARISATION RETIRE,THEN COMFORT MIND DEVELOPMENT IS THE CRUX OF THE DAY,YEAR, RPF CONDUCT DPC ,ALL PREVIOUS YEARS VACANCIES ARE FILLED WITH JUNIORS IN THE PLACE OF SENIOR S..
BY THE TIME... THIS STOP GAP FILLING UP OF PROMOTEES AS ADHOC ASCs CONTINUES BY RAILWAY BOARD RPF WITHOUT HOLDING TIME SCHEDULE DPCs, SAY 2-5YEARS , DIRECT ASCs SHALL GET THEIR NEXT HIGHER RANK PROMOTION SA GRADE, AS DSC, BY VIRTUE OF VACANCY,SAME DECLINED TO DEPARTMENT ASCs ONLY ON PLEA THAT THEY ARE ON ADHOC HENCE NOT ELIGIBLE FOR ACTUAL PROMOTION...
THIS CAPTIONED POSITION IN RAILWAY BOARD RPF IS GOING ON SINCE DECADES,
ALL EFFORTS MADE LOST IN THE WIND AND UNDER THE BUREAUCRACY'NAME SYSTEMATIC HANDLING IN RAILWAY BOARD
... COURT ORDERS PRONOUNCED AGAIN AND AGAIN ARE HAVING NO EFFECT ON RAILWAY BOARD,RPF DIRECTORATE.
ALL GONE WITH THE WIND...LAWS, RULES , JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS ARE FOR NAME SAKE...TO THEM.
WILL THIS PATHETIC CONDITIONS OF THE SERVING ADHOC ASCS AND RETIRED ASCS BE SOLVED OR NOT... WHETHER THE RAILWAY BOARD RPF IS ADOPTING IT'S OWN COURSE OF DUAL SETS OF RULES AND DETHROWING THE JUDICIARY ORDERS AND ALSO THE LAW RULES, CAN'T THIS BE TAKEN AS CONTEMPTUOUS ACT OF THE RAILWAY BOARD RPF, EXAMPLE, IN RECENT SONY VERGHESE CASE ..SLP 1663 OF 2013FILED BY UOI& RAILWAYS DISMISSED BY HONOURABLE SUPREME COURT IN APRIL 2017 WITH SPECIAL DIRECTIONS BY UPHOLDING THE HIGH COURT OF MADRAS ORDERS, BUT SO FAR NO ACTION SEEMS TO HAVE BEEN POURED ON RECORD...
2) MY PROPOSAL SENT TO ALL...
I PRAY TO CONSIDER TO REVIEW THE ORDERS IN FAVOUR OF ADHOC SYSTEM CONTINUANCE FOR SEVERAL YEARS WITHOUT CONDUCTING DPCS, DUE TO WANTON DELAYED TACTICAL DEALINGS OF RAILWAY BOARD RPF...NOT ON EMPLOYEES FAULT...WHY THE EMPLOYEES PENSIONERS ARE MADE TO SUFFER...HOW TO END THIS TYPE OF FLYOVER JUMPING RULES ADOPTED BY RAILWAY BOARD RPF...
MY CONSIDERED SUGGESTIONS MADE...TO RESERVE ... QUOTA OF%IN NEXT HIGHER RANK PROMOTION FROM ASC RPF TO THAT OF DSC,RPF...
THIS ACTION OF SHALL SETRAIGHT AWAY SETUP AND STOP THEIR UNDERGROUND FAVOURITISM, THUS, EVERYTHING IN RPF ON THE ISSUE SHALL STAND SETTLED..
IF THE DPCs are held in later years and if the EMPLOYEE S PENSIONERS are forced to retire without any further promotions, but for the mistake of the ADMINISTRATION'S FAULT, errors,etc... their names should be considered for placement in the DPCs PANELS ACCORDING TO INTAKE QUOTA OF VACANCY OF PREVIOUS YEARS AND they must be given DEEMED PROMOTION at par with the JUNIOR before superannuation as per SENIORITY and pension benefits be given...
Only thing that you are all requested to kindly consider TO READ and publish in your esteemed papers and MAGAZINE s...
NB..I HAVE GIVEN LOTS OF CASES AS PER RECORD WHEREIN THE RAILWAY BOARD RPF PONDERED THEIR FAVOURITISM, EVEN THROUGH DIFFERENTIAL TREATMENT AND APPLICATION OF RULES JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS, ORDERS AS PER THEIR CHOICE SELECTION PROCESS....
Isaac Gabriel
(Expert) 02 November 2017
Your concerns appear to be genuine.But, 'Dishonouring Courts and rule of law' seems to be not pertinent to the issue in question unless the specific case is adjudged so.
DR.VEDULA GOPINATH
(Expert) 03 November 2017
contempt petititons shall be the fitting answers for dishonoring Apex court deisisions. if individual litigants are unable to do that let the NGOs do that.
Dr J C Vashista
(Expert) 03 November 2017
Such long story should be discussed with a local senior lawyer.
Guest
(Expert) 03 November 2017
Agree With Experts/ Advocates Mr.Isaac Gabriel and Dr.Vedula Gopinath
P. Venu
(Expert) 03 November 2017
If at all a contempt application is to be filed, this could only be in Supreme Court itself.
A aggrieved employee can approach the CAT. However, CAT is unpredictable.
Rajendra K Goyal
(Expert) 03 November 2017
Proceed as advised by the expert DR.VEDULA GOPINATH.
P. Venu
(Expert) 03 November 2017
I am afraid, in Service Matters, no PIL is permissible. However, an association group of the aggrieved officials can file file a common petition.
