P a g e | 1To 04-06-2016.The Director General, RPF,Railway Protection Force,Ministry of Railways, Railway Board, RAIL BHAVAN,NEW DELHI-110001. //THROUGH – ______________//Honoured SIR,Sub: Pending Case of V. Seshadri, ASC, RPF, Retired—for DEEMED PROMOTION ANDNOT FOR ACTUAL PROMOTION-REG.REF: 1) MY VOLMUNOUS CORRESPONDENCE ON THE MATTER SINCE 10 YEARS- THROUGH ALL CHANNELS/ MINISTRIES AND THE HON. PRESIDENT OF INDIA, PMO’S SECRETRAIT, MIN. OF RAILWAYS PERSONAL ORDERS . 2) MINISTRY OF RAILWAYS RAILWAY BOARD LETTER, The Director,Establishment (GP), Railway Board, Letter No. E, GP, 2016 - 1 – 5 - under Regn. No. 00623,dated 03-03-2016IN REFERENCE TO MINISTRY OF RAILWAYS RAILWAY BOARD LETTER, The Director,Establishment (GP), Railway Board, Letter No. E, GP, 2016 - 1 – 5 - under Regn. No. 00623,dated 03-03-2016 —it is to inform that the reply was based ONLY REFERING TO ACTUALPROMOTION which I never claimed and demanding. The reply should have been in termsof DEEMED PROMOTION. Your letter DATED 03-03-2016,cited above STATED THAT I AMNOT ELIGIBLE FOR ACTUAL FPOMOTION WHICH I NEVER CLAIMED. IN FACT I HAVE ASKEDFOR DEEMED PROMOTION AS LAID DOWN IN IREM PARA-228/ ISSUED by the RailwayBoard duly INCORPORATING APEX COURT Judg./ ORDERS ON DEEMED PROMOTION. MYclaim is ALSO BASED ON KOLKATA HIGH COURT JUDGMENT ORDER IN RPF CASE- WP ( C ) -6880 OF 1998, based on which the Railway Board had virtually given DEEMEDPROMOTION AND PENSION PROTECTION AT PAR WITH THEIR JUNIORS AS PER SENIORITYBEFORE SUPERANNAUATION to retired RPF Officers of and above ranks from DSC toDIG/IG ranks. It may kindly be noted that - TWO APPEALS AND THE SLP FILED BY THEUOI,RPF AND OTHERS were DISMISSED… I am also placed in similarlycircumstanced/placed person and my case is also to be viewed exactly as that of the abovepersonsIn my representations several times, in these 9 years period, I have ALSO GIVENREFERENCES of Apex court’s judg. /Orders appertaining to several issues concerning toRPF, Service matters, FRs of employees, etc. It is to be noted that the Railway Board, the RPF Directorate had implemented allthe Court Orders pertaining to the Group ‘A’ Cadre Posts, senior scale officers ranks-Divisional Security Commissioners to that of DIG/IGs, and ignoring only for the
P a g e | 2DEPARTMENTAL Asst. Security Commissioner rank post officers cases, even though THEYARE ALSO COME UNDER GROUP ‘A ‘CADRE POST... this shall speak of your step-motherlyfascination towards divide and rule policy, between these two entrants into group ‘A cadreposts—one group entering through UPSC/Direct, and the other group throughdepartmental quota, favouritism one-sided.Systematized and Organised hush-up of reality and cover-ups lest the favouritismwent on since decades and the departmental group ‘A’ cadre Asst. Security Commissionersare virtually crushed down to the earth below in the name and style of ADHOCCONTINUANCE FOR SEVERAL YEARS AND MAKING THEM TO RETIRE, AND THEN CONDUCTPICK AND CHOOSE SYSTEM OF HOLDING THE UPSC\DPCs OF THEIR CHOICE ANDREGULARISE THE ADHOC ASCs – CHOICED PERSONS, THEN PROMOTE THEM TO THEHIGHER RANKS LIKE DIVISIONAL SECURITY COMMISSIONERS TO DIGS, AND SO ON... WHATA WONDERFUL METHODOLOY FOLLOWED BY THE RESPONDENTS, WHICH CAN BE VERIFIEDBY MAKING OUT THE DATES/YEARS OF EACH SUCCH UPSC/DPC, AND THE NAMES OF THESELECTED PERSONS, zonal wise, and DULY DROPPING THE NAMES OF THE RETIREES ANDTHE PLEA taken THAT THEY HAVE SINCE BEEN RETIRED ON THE DATE/YEAR WHEN THEDPC’S WERE HELD AND HENCE THEIR JUNIORS WERE INDUCTED IN THEIR PLACES.THEY HAVE VERY CONVENIENTLY AND PURPOSEFULLY, OR WANTONLY IGNOREDTHE LAW,THE RULES, THE FRs AND APEX COURT JUDG/ORDERS, IREM-PARA-228, AND SOON , FOR ISSUING ORDERS TO THE RETIRED RPF ASCs AS DEEMED PROMTION AT PARWITH THEIR JUNIORS AND PENSION PROTECTION ALSO DENIED. THE RESULT IS THAT THEJUNIORS ARE DRAWING AND ENJOYING MORE PENSION THAN SENIORS... IN MY CASE, I HAVE CITED SEVERAL REFERENCE CASES LIKE- H.S.GREWAL CASE -P.S.RAWAL CASE- BHUPATHI CASE- AND SO ON. FOR ALL MY GRIEVANCES-REPRESENTATIONS, LETTERS, TIME AND AGAIN ABOVE CITED RAILWAY BOARD REFERENCELETER DATED 03-03-2016 TAKEN AS AUTHRITY AND CLOSING THE CASE ON RECORD.KINDLY GO THROUGH THE SAME AND DO JUSTICE. HENCE, ONCE AGAIN PRAY TO DECIDE THE CASE ON MERITS AND NOT TO CLOSETHE CASE JUST TO SHOW ON RECORD THAT ACTION TAKEN IN MY CASE AS REPLIED VIDELETTER CITED ABOVE. IT IS NOT THAT WE CANNOT GO TO THE COURT OF LAW FORJUSTICE. BUT, AS YOU ARE BEING EXPERIENCEED, SEVERAL CASES ARE PENDING SINCEOVER 10 YEARS AND THE RAILWAY BOARD, RPF DIRECTORATE KEEP THE PAPERS AS ONDORMANT FILE, AS THEY ARE NOT MUCH INTERESTED IN OUR CASES. UNLIKE THAT OFBHUPATHI CASE, WHERE AT ALL THE DSCs TO DIG RANK OFFICERS WERE GIVEN DEEMEDPROMOTION AND PENSION BENEFIT AS PER THEIR SENIORITY BEFORE SUPERANNUATION.THIS HAD HAPPENED ONLY BECAUSE, ALL ARE /WERE IN SENIOR ADMN. GRADE RANKSAND MUTUALLY INTERESTED PARTIES... MY CASE IS ABOUT DEEMED PROMOTION AND NOT FOR ACTUAL PROMOTION.KINDLY DIFFERENTIATE THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THESE TWO ASPECTS AS WAS DONE TODSCs AND ABOVE RANKS IN RPF, EVEN BY REFERING THIS ISSUE TO THE LEGAL
P a g e | 3DEPARTMENT OF THE MINISTRY OF RAILWAYS, RAILWAY BOARD, OR TO THE MINISTRY OFLAW AND JUSTICE, AT LEAST TO MAKE YOURSELF AS THE DG, RPF, HOLDING THE POST OFRAILWAY’S SECURITY DIRECTORATE COMPROSING OF AROUND 70,000 RPF PERSONNELUNDER YOUR CONTROL, COMMAND AND SUPERVISION, AND THEIR FATE IS NOW IN YOURHANDS, I PRAY, SINCERELY CALL FOR THE PAPERS AND READ, AND NOT TO ACAT ASBEFORE DGs, JUST CLOSE THE CASE WITH THE SAME TYPE OF REPLY... Enclosures: herein attached please. MOST RESPECTFULLY AND HUMBLY SUBMITTED.YOURS FAITHFULLY,(V. SESHADRI) ASC, RPF, RETIRED. &PRESIDENT, RPF PENSIONER’S WELFARE ASSOCIATION, SOUTH CENTRAL RAILWAY, SECUNDERABAD.H.No. 24-147/4/2, East Anandbagh, MALKAGIRI,SECUNDERABAD-500047. Copy submitted to: Copy Submitted to: DG,RPF, Railway Board, New Delhi for favour of kind infn and necessary action please. Sri. Yugal Kishore Joshi, Director, RPF, RB, NDLS for favour of kind infn and necessary action please. Director, Establishment (GP), Management Services, Railway Board, NDLS for favour of infn&n/a please. Director, DoP&PW, NDLS for favour of information and necessary action please. IG-cum-CSC, SCR, SC for favour of information and necessary action please. IG-CUM-CSC,RPF, East Coast Railway, Bhubaneswar, Odissa. for favour of information and necessary action please. FA&CAO, SCR, SC for favour of information and necessary action please. CPO,SCR, SC for favour of information and necessary action please. SDGM-cum-CVO, SCR, SC for favour of information and necessary action please.Enclosures: herein attached to the letter addressed to the Director General, RPF,New Delhi ,copied to others.I(a): [Honourable Supreme Court Judg.Order-- D.S. Nakara and others Vs Union of India[AIR 1983 SC 130]-· “… The Judgment of the Court was delivered by DESAI,J. , with a slight variationto suit the context Woolesey's prayer : "had I served my God as reverently as I did my king,I would not have fallen on these days of penury" is chanted by petitioners in this group ofpetitions in the Shellian tune : 'I fall on the thorns of life I bleed.' Old age, ebbing mentaland physical prowess, atrophy of both muscle and brain powers permeating thesepetitions, the petitioners in the fall of life yearn for equality of treatment which is beingmeted out to those who are soon going to join and swell their own ranks,..”;· “…(vi) The absence of precedent does not deter the court. Every new norm ofsocio-economic justice, every new measure of social justice commenced for the first timeat some point of time in history. If at that time it was rejected as being without a precedent, law as an instrument of social engineering would have long since been dead.[193 G, 193 C-D]..”;
P a g e | 4· “…4. Any member of the public having sufficient interest can maintain anaction for judicial redress for public injury arising from breach of public duty or fromviolation of some provision of the Constitution or the law and seek enforcement of suchpublic duty and observance of such constitutional or legal provision…”(b): READ FURTHER: All cannot file Writ Petitions in Honorable Courts of Law seekingJustice; all cannot submit Applications/Petitions/Grievances/Complaints/Pension Portalfilings and so on for several years, in my case almost ten years now, and all cannot keepcontinuous correspondence to come out of legal LIMITATION, CAUSE OF ACTION.(c): The Honourable Supreme Court of India Judg.Orders directing the UOI/GOI - to applyits Judg.Orders… “… to other employees identically placed would have been given thesame benefits which would have avoided not only un-necessary litigation but also of thewaste of time and the movement of files and papers which only waste public time…”[ Prem Devi Vs Delhi Administration - SCC SCPl-1989 AJLT 330—17-04-1989];[Yanamandra Guananda Sharma Vs UOI and Ors- 1991 (2) ATLJ 123 ( Calcutta)- 30-05-1991]· …”… All decisions of this type should be treated as judgements in rem and beapplied to the persons similarly circumstanced…”(d): Herein, in my terminology, the King- for us, the Lords of the Land, India, the UOI/GOI. As ADHOC ASC, I do not challenge, but seek the benefit/ privilege given by the La;w,the UOI and the Rules framed thereon of Pension benefit at par with the juniors, who areplaced above me,( / all other ADHOC ASCs retired) in all respect, in the eyes of Law,Society, status, dignity, FRs deprived, and what not, on whose fault, but by the vestedinterests in power and authority, capable of doing things at their wish and conveniencefrom the Desk of the Railway Board, Director General, RPF, who seems to be working forname sake and a figure-head. All these feelings are mine, conceived in my life span withthe association of RPF; but still, I pray the GOD, that a day, not far, shall come and set rightthe matters in the Railway Board, DG,RPF Directorate, and there shall not be any wordcalled-“ADHOC” in RPF and all the departmental promotes/Appointees as ASCs in Group‘A’ Cadre Post work with smile and happiness like that of other Railway MinistryPersonnel. “YE HOSOLANKA UDAN HAI. O! GOD GIVE US STRENGTH AND LEAD TOSUCCESS;”1. Railway Board, Director General, RPF vide Circular Letter No. 2004/Sec€/SR-2/4 dated28-05-2005 have published seniority list of 364 Inspectors, RPF, for the period from 01-02-2003, CHECK UP YOUR name AND WHERE YOU stand at Serial No. of the list.2. The GOI/Department of Personnel and Training, (DoP&T)- vide Office MemorandumNo. 22011/4/98-Estt.(D) dated 12-10-1998 have circulated Direction Orders to allMinistries/Departments giving detailed …” Procedure to be followed by the DepartmentalPromotion Committee (DPC) in regard to retired employees…”. This is done in consultationwith the Ministry of Law (Department of Legal Affairs).3. As per above OFFICE MEMORANDUM, the Names of retired officials are also to beincluded in the DPC Panel(s). Such retired officials would, however, have no right for actualpromotions (unless otherwise ordered by Court). The OM, envisaged that the DPC(s), may,if need be, prepare extended Panel(s) following the Principles prescribed in the DoP&TOM No.22011/8/87-Esttt.(D) dated 09-04-1996.4. However, and in contra to the above Orders, Railway Board, Director General, RPF,have interpreted the above GOI/DoP&T OM to their convenience and choice, in theirOrder No. E(GP) 98/1/7 dated 07-09-2000. While publishing the names as indicated in theDPC Panel Lists , they have dropped the retirees names who were selected andempanelled by the DPC(s) against year wise quota vacancies. The names of ADHOC Asst.Security Commissioner’s figured in the Promotion List /Orders of UPSC/DPCs published
P a g e | 5their Notification only naming the in-service officials duly regularizing in-service AdhocASCs, juniors to ADHOC ASCs retired. Juniors were promoted to the next higher rank asDivisional Security Commissioners, RPF. This system in Railway Board, RPF is continuingsince decades…No where it mentioned that names should not be published or Notifiedthrough proper NOTIFICATION BY RAILWAY BOARD.5. On record, Applications/Representations made by V.Seshadr, ASC,RPF, Retired sincearound ten years and correspondence with the Railway Board, DG,RPF though continuing,no positive steps in accordance with the Law/ the Rules, Court Orders is being taken bythe DG,RPF till date. This is evident on record that V.Seshadri, met the DG,RPF on 17-07-2015 in person , discussed on this issue of making the ASCs to continue as ADHOC, usingdelaying tactics to conduct DPCs, made them to retire, and at their convenience andchoice hold DPCs, give juniors to become DSCs, and so on… no action initiated so far.6. Railway Board vide Letter No. 2007/Sec€/RTI|/2 dated 19/22-09-2008, have replied toone retired ASC, that the DPC for the years 1994 to 1997 was held on 16th -18th August,2000 and the subsequent DPC for the years 1998 to 2002 was held on 18th -19th May,2004, and that he was empanelled by the later DPC against a vacancy of 1998;7. That, the DPC recommendations were given effect to from 04-06-2004. Since HE, theretired ADHOC ASC, had ceased to be in service as on 04-06-2004 the date when the DPC’sPromotion Names List was Notified by them; hence name dropped, and cited the OM,the promotion Order in favour of the Petitioner was not issued in terms of DoP&T’sinstructions contained in its OM No. 22011/4/98-Estt (D0 dated 12-10-1998.8. The DoP&T vide its Letter No. 41011/12/2012-Estt. (D) Dated 07-12-2012 informedthat no amendment has been made to the DoP&T OM No. 22011/4/98-Estt. (D) dated 12-10-1998 and this OM, as such, is still in operation. This OM is reiterated in Jan, 2015;9. Railway Board, Director General, RPF vide their Letter No. E (GP) 2005/1/10 dated 10-06-2008, held next DPC for selection for promotion of Departmental ADHOC Asst. SecurityCommissioners/Inspectors, RPF for regularisation as ASC, RPF and the UPSC/DPC vide itsLetter No. F.1/2/2/2008-AP-IV dated 21-10-2008 have submitted its Report duly statingthat the DPC having examined the CRs, Integrity Certificates of the eligible Officers andhaving assessed them ‘FIT’, placed the names in the Select Panel Lists as per year wisevacancy , which included the names of retirees, FIT, also.10. The DPC recommended the Panel for promotion to the post of ASC in RPF with adirection to the Railway Board that its Order should consist the names of the Officers asmentioned in their Order/Annexure as stated therein for following years duly indicatingvacancy position:Year General SC ST TOTAL2003-042004-052005-06 061010010103------071113 TOTAL: 31 (B): Railway Board Letter No. E (GP)/2006/3/17 to the UPSC for holding the DPC to fill updepartmental quota vacancies in RPF. Based on this, the UPSC, vide its Letter No. 1/2/(8)2009-AP-4 dated 12-05-2009 submitted UPSC/DPC’s Select Panel Names to theRespondents duly including the Names of the Retirees as per Year-Wise Vacancy Positionand placed the retiree’s Names also in their Panel Lists, viz:Year General SC ST TOTAL2005 03 -- -- 03
P a g e | 62006200720084009030803--04----521203TOTAL:75__(C): But, the Railway Board dropped the Retiree Names quoting the above DoP&T OrderNo. 22011/4/98-Estt. (D) Dated 12-10-1998, which is nothing but misinterpretation to suitto their choice for incorporating juniors names in place of retirees. They are denying givingDEEMED PROMOTION TO RECTIFY THEIR MISTAKES AND FOLLOW IREM-228.(C) They have included the name of B.D.Rohit, ADHOC ASC, listed in the Select Panel List ofUPSC/DPC of 2008. (B.D. Rohit, (DOB- 04-01-1944), he was selected in the DPC of 21-10-2008 against the vacancy of 2002-2003 in the DPC of 2008.). His name is not found in theearlier DPCs.(D) Likewise, the name of one Mr. Joseph Kurian, Inspector of South Central Railway Zone,died on 27-02-2000, but for the RPF , UPSC/DPCs , he was shown as alive in the DPCs of2008/2009, his name figured in the UPSC/DPC select FIT Panel List for the vacancy of2005/2006. The DPC certified in their letter to Railway Board that they have verified theCRs, Integrity Certificates of all the ADHOC ASCs/Inspectors and found them, including Mr.Joseph Kurian, Hats off the UPSC/DPC members and to the RPF Officers who had writtenhis five years CRs, and the Integrity Certificate for Late Mr. Joseph Kurian;(D) Another glaring on record matter is that one Mr. M. Vijaya Kumar, South CentralRailway Zone , while working as Inspector is the recipient of IPM/PPM/MR/DG/GMMedals, and several Rewards/Awards, but, ironically, his name not figured even in theREJECTED—UNFIT LIST FOR THE ABOVE YEARS VACANCY—2000 TO 2008 DPCs. Why???. II:1(a): Out of the above 31/75 VACANCIES, names for filling up the departmental quotavacancies of ASCs, RPF for the years from 2003 to 2008, the Railway Board, DG,RPF, havedropped the names of all the RETIREES SHOWING REASON THAT ON THE DATE/YEARWHEN UPSC/DPCs WERE HELD THEY STNDS RETIRED AND HENCE NAMES DROPPED.1(B) . Announcement of DPC Panel Lists BY THE RAILWAY BOARD = DG,RPF THROUGH ITSNOTIFICATION IS NOT IN LINE WITH THE LAW/RULES AND was not issued in terms ofDoP&T’s instructions contained in its OM No. 22011/4/98-Estt (D0 dated 12-10-1998.1. (c): The action is contrary to the above said OM of the DoP&T, against the Law, GOIOrders, the Rules, natural justice, Apex Court Judg.Orders/ IREM – Para 228, and donewith ulterior motive to supress the Retiree ASCs Fundamental Rights and bring in thejuniors in their place, and they were given next higher promotion as Divisional SecurityCommissioner, RPF and placed them in Higher Scale of Pay in Group A Cadre Post.2. Some of the Names of Juniors whose names have been taken in to consideration bythe Respondents for Regularisation as ASCs and given next promotion, are: ( As perseniority list of ADHOC ASCs/Inspectors, total 364 names-—the name of one retireeADHOC ASC-from 1998-2004, Mr. S.Gnana Sambandam, Mr. V.Seshadri, ADHOC ASC from2001 to 2006, Stands at Serial Number—02 and 92 respectively as per RailwayBoard Circular Letter No. 2004/Sec€/SR-2/4 dated 28-05-2005:All the following ADHOC ASCs, juniors having been regularised, promoted to the Rank ofDivisional Security Commissioners, RPF and later retired on superannuation with higherpension benefit than seniors; On Whose Fault? Railway Board washing their hands byciting one or the other point .
P a g e | 71. Honoured Sir, a Score of Junior ADHOC ASCs (More than 100/200) have beenregularised and promoted to the Rank of Divisional Security Commissioner, RPF.2. I. THE RAILWAY BOARD, DG, RPF NOT IMPLEMENTING THE IREM (INDIAN RAILWAYSESTABLISHMENT MANUAL) PARA-228. – Rly.Bd's letter No. E[NG]I-2005/PM1/34C.C dated23-02-2007 (RBE No.27 /07) - Rectification of administrative errors – for Grant ofProforma/Deemed promotion – / FIXATION OF PENSION BEFORE SUPERANNUATION--RAILWAY BOARD ISSUED THIS ORDER IN THE WAKE OF HONORABLE SUPREME COURT’SJUDGMENT/ORDER – go through Last Paras…II. The Orders state that the retirees will not get actual promotion and arrearsthereon, but the Law/Judg.Orders state that they may be given DEEMED PROMOTION ASPER SENIORITY AND PENSION BENEFIT BEFORE SUPERANNUATION. THIS IS ALSO DENIED?a. Hon’ble Supreme Court’s judgement date 13-08-1997 in Civil Appeal No. 8904 of 1994[Union of India & Others Vs. P.O. Abraham & Others;b. The validity of these instructions has again been upheld by Hon’ble Apex Court in CivilAppeal No. 4222/2006 arising out of SLP[C] No. 23021/2005 in Union of India [ throughGeneral Manager, Northern Railway & Others] Vs. Shri Tarsem Lal & Others in theirjudgement date 21-09-2006.c. Last PARAS OF THE JUDGMENT MAY KINDLY BE READ…” The result is that therespondent will be given deemed promotion, if any, before retirement and also the benefitin the matter of fixing pensions.III. However, THE RAILWAY BOARD, DIRECTOR GENERAL, RPF, TAKING INTOCONSIDERATION OF HONORABLE KOLKATA HIGH COURT JUDGMENT ORDER IN W.P. No.6880/1998, (two Appeals filed by the UOI and others dismissed). THE DSCs (DIVISIONALSECURITY COMMISSIONERS, RPF) AND ABOVE RANK RPF OFFICERS RETIRED ARE GIVENDEEMED PROMOTION AND PENSION BENEFITS BEFORE SUPERANNUATION. BUT THESAME PROVISION NOT EXTENDED TO ASCs, WERE IN SIMILARLY PLACED SITUATIONS,CIRCUMSTANCED POSITIONS…. What type of discrimination shown can be seen here?IV. It is submitted that under Rule-27.1(e) –the DG, RPF shall compile, on all Indiabases, a seniority list of all Inspectors and superior officers and to maintain it up-to-date athis headquarters; this is not followed since decade?V. Under Rule- 27.2(b) – the DG, RPF shall constitute the Departmental PromotionCommittee (DPC), preferably in the beginning of each year, for selections to the rank ofAssistant Commandant/Assistant Security Commissioner and above and maintain an up-to-date gradation list and dossiers of confidential reports of such officers. This is also notfollowed since decades in RPF? Any Representation sent filed? VI. It is submitted that amongst these Inspectors, as per RPF Rules 55 and 56,departmental promotion to the rank of Assistant Commandant/Assistant SecurityCommissioner, RPF were to be made in accordance with RPF Rules. VII. RPF Department has promoted and appointed some of the Inspectors andpublished their names and started showing their names as promoted and APPOINTED onad hoc basis, they worked as ASCs, RPF without break in service till superannuation andthe DPCs were delayed not on account of them but the DPCs were delayed, and held asper Railway Board, DG,RPF Choice against the Law/Rules, and GOI/DoP&T Orders thereon. 4. Honourable Supreme Court of India- Judgment/Orders in service matter may attractin this case also and in favour of the RETIREES, PLACED here under for kind perusal:
P a g e | 8I (a): Effect of wrong application of Rules or without any reasonable ground- the Courtmay direct the Competent Authority to place the employee in the higher grade with effectfrom the date when his junior was placed therein, with consequential monetary benefits;· Dharam Vs Administration- (1991)17 ATC 925; AIR (1991) SC 1924;I. (b): Liability of Officers- Bureaucracy is also accountable for the acts done illegally,when the Court exercises Judicial Review ( Articles-32,14,16,309)-· State of Bihar Vs Subhash Singh- AIR (1997) SC 1390-Para-03;II. When a person is Appointed to a Post according to the Rules, his seniority is to becounted from the date of his Appointment and not according to the date of hisConfirmation / Regularisation;· Bhatnagar Vs UOI- (1991) 1 SCC 544; (1991) 16 ATC 501; III. Actionable Wrong- Application of ‘parens patriae’- Where the Petitioner’sFundamental Rights are impaired by Legislation or Rules or Government Orders, theCourts can interfere even if it is a matter concerning to service (Article-32,14,16,309);· FCI Workers Vs FCI- AIR (1990)-SC 2178;· (1990) Supp.SCC 296; (1990) 4 SCR 745;IVSOME POINTS, for consideration:Let the DG,RPF, Railway Board and others concerned take note of the GOI/ DoP&T, OMNo. 22011/4/98-ESTT. (D), dated 12-10-1998, reiterated in Jan, 2014, and published in allleading News Papers and media, which envisaged that the DPCs have to be conducted intime schedule and in case the DPCs are not conducted due to ‘beyond reasonable control’,as per DG,RPF version, say herein due to Court Cases, the DPCs if held in later years, thenames of the retired employees also to be taken into consideration against the year wisevacancy as per seniority ( herein- as per seniority of Inspectors, RPF, being maintained onall India basis as per RPF Rules), and if necessary prepare extended Panels also. This Orderwas issued after consultation with the Ministry of Law. But the same is not being followedin RPF. In the light of this OM, we humbly request the DG,RPF, Railway Board to examinethis issue vis-à-vis the Judgment Order of Honourable High Court of Kolkata pronounced inW.P.6880/1998, and with that of UOI Appeals (dismissed) and the implementation Ordersissued to some of the Group ‘A’ Officers , including the retirees/ expired persons also thereby giving them Proforma/ DEEMED Promotion and pension benefit. We earnestly request the DG,RPF and others concerned to implement the above Orderscrupulously and follow the directions and Orders issued in WP No.6880/1998 of theHonourable High Court of Kolkata, pronounced in the Judgment in 2003,and the Appealsfiled by the UOI and others were dismissed. This Order was rightly implemented in thecases of some RPF Group ‘A’ Officers and the Railway administration has given the benefitof Proforma/Deemed Promotion at par with their Juniors and the benefit of Pensionfixation before superannuation, and the arrears. The same principle and system also beapplied to retired ADHOC ASCs. HOW DoP&T AND OTHER ORDERS ON ADHOC ,DPCs, ETC,AND IN PARTICULAR ITS OM NO.2201114/98- ESTT(D) DATED 12-10-1998, WHICH WASREITERATED VIDE LATEST LETTER NO. 22011/1/2014- ESTT( D) DATED 14-11-2014, ETC.,ARE JUST PUT IN DUSTBIN BY RAILWAY WHILE CONSIDERING RETIRED NAMES FORPUTTING THEIR NAMES IN PANEL AND GIVING NOTIONAL/ DEEMED PROMOTION, JUST TOPROTECT PENSION BENEFITS...IN THIS LETTER, IT IS VERY CLEARLY, RATHER OFFENDINGLY,STATED IN PARA-2 ...KINDLY AS SAID....ACTIONS....the undesirable trends negate the verypurpose of the above said OM. I PRAY TO GO THROUGH THE SAME AND RENDER JUSTICETO ME AND WHO ARE IN SIMILARLY PLACED CONDITIONS AND CIRCUMSTANCES.,4IREM
P a g e | 9Para No. 228, Apex Court Judgment Orders in SLP (C) 4222 of 2007 and the Railway Boardissued orders under Para 228 to give Deemed Promotion to the retired employees andbenefit in pension fixation at par with their juniors. The UPSC/DPC found Mr. Sambandam as FIT in the Select Panel List for the vacancy of2004, but the Railway Board, DG,RPF published the Notification only in June,2004, afterhis retirement, duly dropping his name from the ASC rank list only on the ground that hewas not in service when the UPSC/DPC List was published and hence his name droppedas OM of 12-10-1998, this is nothing but misinterpretation to suit to their convenienceand Choice; Likewise, names of V. SESHADRI, S.V.SATYANARSYANA, and many other adhoc ASCs,NAMES ALSO DROPPED EVEN THOUGH THEY ARE SELECTED ANDEMPANELED IN THESELECT DPC PANEL LISTS FOR 2005/2006 VACANCY OF PERIOD OF THESE YEARS, AND BOTHWERE ALREADY WORKING AGAINST CLEAR VACANCY, AND CONTINUEDTHEIR SERVICE SHOULDERING, STATUS AND POSITION AS ASC,RPF WITHOUT BREAK INSERVICE AND FULFILLED ALL THE REQUIREMENTS OF DoP&T ORDERS TOGET DEEMED PROMOTION AND PENSION FIXATION AT PAR WITH JUNIORS in ,RPF BYTHE UPSC / DPCs TAKING PLEA OF ABOVE OM...Let them—THE RESPONDENTS also answer for the following:1. The name of one Inspector/RPF, Mr. Joseph Kurian, who expired on 27-02-2000while working at Aurangabad of South Central Railway Zone, Hyderabad Division,was also found considered FIT by the UPSC/DPC and figured his name in the FIT list.How come the ACRs/Integrity Certificate of a dead person( died on 27-02-2000)ACRs , SRs, etc. of last five years were seen and certified by the UPSC/DPC in2008 and made him fit in panel for 2005/2006 vacancy.2. Likewise, the name of one ADHOC ASC, Mr. M. Vijaya Kumar, ASC/Retired in theyear 2005 from Kurda Road Division of the East Coast Railway was not reflectedEVEN in the UPSC/DPCs of 2008/2009 ‘Assessment List or in the UNFIT List’. Inaddition to IPM/PPM, he received Honourable MR Medal, DG, RPF Medal, GM, andseveral other Medals/Awards/Rewards, etc., Before promotionas ASC,Mr.M.Vijaya Kumar worked as Inspector over South Central Railway Zone. Itis not known as how this miracle has been done in theUPSC/DPCs lists of RPF forGroup ‘A’ Cadre Post. What norms followed here in these two above cases notmentioned. What happened to his ACRs/Integrity Certificate, SRs etc., unlesssomething wrong his name could have at least come in the Assessment or in theUNFIT lists by DPCs, in both of these lists, his name is not figured in the DPCs of2008 and 2009;What is the reason. 3. There may be some more such cases from other Indian Zonal Railways; to the bestof knowledge and information, over Southern Railway Zone, not a singleAdhoc ASC retired without regularization through one or the other UPSC/DPCs heldby the Railway Board, DG,RPF at their convenience and choice and to suit to themand having got next higher rank promotion as Divisional Security Commissioner,RPF who are all junior toMr. Gnana sambandam, V.SESHADRI, S.V.SATYANARAYANA;4. Only Two cases/ names of Inspectors/adhoc ASCs OF SOUTHERN RAILWAY ZONE are found UNFIT AND NOT SELECTED ON THE FACE OF THE RECORDS THAT THEYGOT PUNISHMENTS, ETC., brought before the DPCs in the year 2008/2009; 5. THIS IS NOT LIKE THE CASE/NAME OF late Mr. Joseph Kurian, Inspector died in 2000shown in the SELECT PANEL LIST OF 2008 as FIT in the PANEL;
SEVERAL CASES OF ILLEGALLY,/ IRREGULAR/ ONE SIDED FAVORITE THINGS THAT ARE AVAILABLE ON RECORD... FORGETTING UNLAWFUL GAIN TO SELECTIVE OFFICIAL AND WRONGFUL LOSS TO RAILWAYS DONE WERE PROJECTED TO DG,RPF, RAILWAY BOARD OTHER OFFICIAL VIDE LETTER DATED 08-06-2016....20-06-2016,...10-09-2016... LATEST ONE ,BUT NO REPLY EXCEPT THAT NOT ELIGIBLE FOR ACTUAL PROMOTION???WHO CAN SOLVE???
