Full Judgment
HON'BLE Mrs. K. NOORJEHAN, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER
1. The applicants who are retrenched Casual Labourers of South Western Railway, Mysore Division challenge their non-absorption in Group-D cadre in preference to their juniors.
2 According to the applicants, they have 1060 days each of casual service to their credit. They earlier approached this Tribunal by filing OA 636/98 which was disposed of by order dated 31.1.2000 directing the Regional Labour Commissioner (Central) Bangalore, to adjudicate the issue and to pass necessary orders. The Regional Labour Commissioner (Central), Bangalore in its findings dated 16.8.2004 found that the applicants are casual labourers and they are entitled to be absorbed (Annx.A2). Having denied re-engagement/absorption according to their turn, they had approached the Tribunal through O.A. 805/2007, which was allowed by A-3 order. Since Annx.A3 was not implemented, the applicants filed Contempt Petition No.51/2009 which was closed by order dated 1.12.2009 in pursuance to the order Annx.A4 issued by the respondents whereby the applicants have been included in the Live Casual Labour Register of Mysore Division of South Western Railway. Now the grievance of the applicants is that in spite of the orders of the Tribunal respondents have not taken any action to absorb the applicants in Group-D posts. They are also aggrieved that several juniors with lesser number of days of service have been screened, empanelled and absorbed by the respondents.
3 The respondents in their reply submitted that pursuant to the order of the Tribunal, the applicants were directed to report to the Personnel Branch along with original certificates. They were screened by the Screening Committee nominated for the purpose and empanelled. They were subjected to medical fitness test conducted at the Railway Hospital, Mysore and applicant No.1 was found unfit in all classes and applicant No.2 was found fit in B-1 classification. Accordingly applicant No.2 was appointed as Trackman and applicant No.1 was given an opportunity to prefer an appeal as per the provisions of Indian Railway Medical Manual. Therefore, it is submitted that applicant No.1 was addressed Annx.R4 to prefer an appeal within one month for re-medical examination.
3 Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties.
4 Admittedly the applicant No.2, M.Velayudhan was offered appointment in Group-D category as Trackman vide Annx.R3. As for as applicant No.1, M.Sivadasan is concernd, he was declared unfit in all classes by the Medical authority and he was directed to prefer an appeal for re-medical examination as per Indian Railway Medical Manual provisions within a period of one month. The applicant No.1 will submit his appeal within one month, if not done so far, alongwith a medical certificate from another doctor as per the extant provision of Indian Railway Medical Manual. The respondents are directed to consider his appeal and issue a medical certificate to him, showing the prescribed medical standard and parameters which he has not met, in case of such an eventuality within a time line of one month on receipt of his appeal. The O.A is disposed of as above. No costs.