S.K. CHANDAN v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
Citation: [1977] 1 S.C.R. 785; 1976 INSC 244
Court: Supreme Court of India
Bench: Y.V. CHANDRACHUD , A.C. GUPTA
Judgment date:
Case summary
1976 INSC 244. Supreme Court of India judgment dated 1976-10-12. S.K. CHANDAN v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
788 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [l977] 1 S. C. R. S. K. CHANDAN \I. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. October 12, 1976 [Y. V. CHANDRACHUD AND A. C. GUPTA, JJ. ] Indian Railway fa·tablishment Code-Para 157-Whether tlit paragrapil empowers the Rail1ray Board to make mies for tlie gazetted Railway servants-Constmction of para I 57. (ii) 1'romotions-Riuht to pro11101ion-Whet/1er promotion of class Ill employec. 1· to class II is govemed by "Advance Correction Slip No. 70" introducing w. e. f. March 11, 1973, new mies 324 to 328 and substituting new rnle iOl in Chapter Ill of the Indian Railway Establisllmenl Manual- Scope and applicability of Rules 301 and 328(2), (4) Gll n of non-gazetted employees of the Diesel Locom? l1ve Wo! ks. The appellant relied very strongly on rule 328 (2) wluch provides that selections and promotions made in the Diesel Locomotive Works from 1-891961 to the date on which Slip No. 70 came into force:, namely March I 1, 1973, shall not be valid.
He urges tlmt this provision casts an obligation on the Railway Board to recall all promotions made from amongst Class III servants to Class P'. posts from August I - 1961 to March 11, 1973 and that therefore those who are already promoted to gazetted posts ought to be demoted and a fresh panel must be formed for selection to Class II posts from amongst employees working in Class III posts. The infirmity of this argument is that Chapter HI applies only to non-gazetted servants and to their inter se promotion and therefore the word! > "promotions made in the Diesel Locomotive Works" which occur in rule 328(2) must be construed as meaning " promotions made in the Diesel Locomotive Works from one category of non-gazetted post to another category of non-gazetted post". The same answer would effectively meet the contention of the appellant that the words "promotion to the higher grades" occurring in paragraph 328 ( 4) mean promotion to a Class II post.
The words "promotion to the higher grades" must in the context mean __.. promotion to any of the higher grades in the non-gazetted categ0ry. Rule 123 (3) of Chapter I, Section B, Railway Establishment Manual, defines "grades" as sub-divisions of a class, each bearing a different scale of pay. If the grievance of the appellant who holds a non-gazetted post in Class III, at all is or can be that he has not been promoted to Class II, he must show that the railway administration has violated some provision contained in Chapter II, section A, of the Railway F. stablish-ment Manual. It is useless and irrelevant for him to show that the provisions of Chapter III introduced by Advance Correction Slip No. 70 have not been complied with by the administration. None of the rules introduced by that slip governs the promotion of a Class III employee to a Class II post.
The High Court was accordingly ri~t in refusing to issue a writ of mandamus directing the railway administration to apply the prov_isions of Chapter III in the matter of the appellant's promotion to a Class II post. · . ,. -• · The appellant has filed a civil miscellaneous petition (7990 of 1976) complaining of adverse entries in his Service record and of the 790 SUPJ!. 1'. M'E COU! tT Jtl'. PORTS [1977] I S. C. R. A fact that he has been superseded in the matter of promotion. These very grievances were made by him in the High Court but he lost on those points. While granting special leave to appeal. this Court refused to consider the correctness of the High Court's findings on those issues. The leave being restricted to the question as regards the application of rnlcs introduced by Advance Correction Slip No. 70 .. the appellant cannot be permitted to raise questions which must be B taken as finally decided under the judgment of the High Court.
For these reasons the appeal fails but there will be no order as to costs. • Appeal dismissed. S. R. •
Source: Supreme Court eSCR. Dataset: Dattam Labs, CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.