AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
O R D E R
By Hon’ble Mr. Tarun Shridhar, Member (A) We have joined this Division Bench online through video conferencing.
Shri Dharmednra Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicants and Shri Girijesh Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the respondents are present.
By virtue of the instant OA, the applicants seek a direction to the respondents to take the decision expeditiously on a proposal submitted by the General Manager, Diesel Locomotive Works, Varanasi on 23.01.2017 bearing number DLW/Stores/593/Pt-VII. The subject of this letter is re-organization proposal of Unit Purchase Cell. For the sake of clarity, the relief of the applicants, as contained in the OA, reads as follows: -
“(i). to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent No. 1/competent authority to take final decision on the proposal of the merger and re-organization of Unit Purchase Cell pending and in active consideration before the Railway Board.
(ii). to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent No. 2 to take a suitable decision on the pending representation dt. 11/08/2021 of the applicant as well as other similarly situated employees for postponement of AMM (Group-B) selection under 70% quota of store department.
(iii). to issue any other suitable writ, order or direction in the facts and circumstances of the case which this Hon’ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper.
(iv). To award cost of the petition in favour of the petitioners.”
Learned counsel for the applicants argues that this proposal has been pending with the respondents for a period of five years but they have not taken any final decision on the same. Moreover, he points out that the respondents are going ahead with making promotions of various categories of staff contrary to the proposal submitted by the General Manager, hence the applicants are being put to disadvantage as far as their future career prospects are concerned. Therefore, he seeks a direction to the competent authority amongst the respondents for a time bound decision on this proposal.
Learned counsel for the respondents, on the other hand, argues that the proposal relates to a matter of policy and is clearly beyond the jurisdiction of this Tribunal. He submits that no adverse order has been passed against the applicants which should necessitate the present original application. This being a policy matter, learned counsel argues, is squarely within the domain of the appropriate authority of the respondents and they cannot be directed to take a decision on the same this way or that.
We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and also gone through the documents on record.
The document at page 55 is a proposal for re-organization of the Unit Purchase Cell at the Diesel Locomotive Works, Varanasi. The proposal submits that since a similar re-organization has been done in the other cadres, the same principle should apply for the re-organization of DLW, Varanasi.
While we appreciate the contention of the learned counsel for the applicant that once the proposal has been sent to the competent authority by an officer of the rank of General Manager, it is incumbent upon them to take a decision on the same. Although, on the other hand, we are also aware and conscious of the fact that the authority should act independently and this Tribunal has its confines. We agree with the learned counsel for the respondents that this is a policy matter and squarely falls within the domain of appropriate authority. It would not be judicious on our part to give any time bound direction to the respondents. However, since the matter is being brought to our notice, we feel that in the interest of justice, it would be appropriate to dispose of this OA at the admission stage itself with an advice to the appropriate authority amongst the respondents to take a decision upon the said proposal and also the representation of the applicants dated 11.08.2021 in accordance with rules and as deemed appropriate.
With the above direction, the OA stands disposed off.
We would like to observe that we have not examined or commented upon the merit of the claim of the applicants.
No order as to costs.