Anil Goswami & Others vs Union Of India & Others

Pradeep Kumar, Member (A)

MA 2332/2020 filed for joining together in a single application is allowed, for the reasons mentioned therein.

The father of each of the applicant herein, was serving the Railways. It is pleaded that at that time, the Railways had initiated a scheme known as

Liberalized Active Retirement Scheme for Guaranteed Employment for Safety Staff (LARSGESS). Under this scheme, an older employee working

on a specified safety related post, could take voluntary retirement and in his place, his son/ward could be granted employment. It is also pleaded that

all formalities were completed also but employment was still not granted.

They have since retired on attaining the age of superannuation.

It is submitted that the said Scheme of LARSGESS was put on hold w.e.f. 27.10.2017 because of certain judicial pronouncements and this may

have been the reason why Respondents awaited for clarification from Railway Board before offering employment. The scheme was finally terminated

also vide circular Dated 05.03.2019. However, in respect of cases pending as of 27.10.2017, the matter was adjudicated by Hon’ble Apex Court

vide their judgement Dt 26.3.2019 in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 219 of 2019, Narinder Siraswal and Ors. Vs U.O.I. and Anr., wherein certain

directions were passed. The operative para reads as under:

“ xxxxx

Since the petitioners are claiming benefit under the scheme which was prevalent when applications were preferred by the petitioners, we give liberty

to the petitioners to approach the concerned authorities with appropriate representations. If such representation is made, the authorities will do well to

consider the matter within two weeks on preferring of the representations. 3 OA No-1739/2020 With these observations, the writ petiotion stands

disposed of. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.â€​

The applicants now pleaded that the retired employees had completed all the formalities within the due date, however, yet they were not employed.

At this stage, the learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants submitted their representations which are still pending, and they will be

satisfied if the respondents are directed to pass a reasoned and speaking order on their representations within a certain time frame, in terms of

Hon’ble Apex Court judgment dated 26.03.2019 (Para 3 supra).

Matter has been heard. Shri Shalinder Saini, learned counsel represented the applicants and Shri Shailendra Tiwary, who is a panel counsel for the

Railways and who is present in the video conferencing, was called upon to take notice on behalf of the respondents. Accordingly, Shri Shailendra

Tiwary, learned counsel represented the respondents.

Learned counsel for the applicants undertakes to supply a copy of the O.A. along with annexures thereto, to Shri Shailendra Tiwary, learned counsel

for the respondents, positively by tomorrow.

In view of the foregoing, the O.A. is disposed of at the admission stage itself, without going into the merits of the case, with a direction to the

respondents to pass a reasoned and speaking order on the pending representations of the applicants, keeping in view the Hon’ble Apex

Court’s direction dated 26.03.2019, within a period of four weeks and the decision so taken shall be advised to the applicants within this time. No

costs.