Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010177032024 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/4439/2024 1.THE UNION OF INDIA AND 3 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE GENERAL MANAGER (P) N F RAILWAY, MALIGAON, GUWAHATI- 781011 2: GENERAL MANAGER, N F RAILWAY MALIGAON GUWAHATI-781011 3: DIVISIONAL RAILWAY MANAGER(P) KATIHAR N F RAILWAY DIST.- KATIHAR PIN-854105 4: DIVISIONAL RAILWAY MANAGER (P) RANGIYAN F RAILWAY DIST KAMRUP ASSAM PIN- 78135 VERSUS SRI TAPAS DEBNATH S/O- RAJENDRA CHANDRA DEBNATH, SECTION CONTROLLER ,RANGIYA DIVISION , N F RAILWAY, DISTRICT- KAMRUP, ASSAM 781354 For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. H. Gupta, Central Government Counsel. For the Respondent(s) : Mr. S. Nath, Advocate. – B E F O R E – HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. ASHUTOSH KUMAR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY 15.09.2025 (Ashutosh Kumar, CJ) We have heard Mr. H. Gupta, learned Central Government Counsel Page No.# 2/5 for the petitioners/Union of India & 3 Ors. and Mr. S. Nath, learned Advocate for the sole respondent. 2. In this writ petition, the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Guwahati Bench (hereinafter to be referred as “Tribunal”) dated 01.08.2023 passed in O.A. No.040/0204/2017 is under challenge. 3. The records reveal that the respondent, while working as a Goods Guard in the Railways, had opted for being considered for the selection post of Section Controller, for which post, the feeder cadre comprised the posts of Goods Guards and Senior Goods Guards. 4. For being selected to the higher post of Section Controller, a Goods Guard or a Senior Goods Guard must have completed 2(two) years of minimum service in the immediate lower grade of notified post; should not be over 48 years; and must be qualified in train passing. 5. After being selected, a Section Controller has to undergo a training for a total period of 12(twelve) months in the Yard and Control Office before being posted as a Section Controller. If the candidate in question does not come out successful in the training, his name would stand deleted from the post of Section Controller. 6. There is no cavil on the factual position that the respondent was appointed as Section Controller on 27.10.2016. Thus, before 27.10.2016, he would have been serving the Railways on the post of Goods Guard, notwithstanding the fact that while serving as Goods Guard, he had opted for being considered for selection for the higher post of Section Controller. Page No.# 3/5 7. The records further reveal that the post of Senior Goods Guard is a non-selection post which is to be filled up on the basis of seniority. The respondent was the senior-most Goods Guard but was not admitted as Senior Goods Guard for the only reason that he had opted for being considered for selection to the post of Section Controller, which ultimately he did. 8. Bypassing him, 4(four) Goods Guards, who are junior to him, namely, Pranab Kumar Deb, Rajib Koch, Rajen Chandra Das and Jayanta Kumar Kalita were placed high in the seniority list. 9. On the day when the respondent was promoted to the post of Section Controller, he was the senior-most Goods Guard and, therefore, he only was entitled to be posted as Senior Goods Guard, which entail with it higher pay and other emoluments, beyond what is admissible to a Goods Guard. 10. This aspect was over-looked; for the rectification of which the respondent had approached the Tribunal. 11. The Tribunal found that bypassing the name of the respondent in the seniority list only on the ground that he had opted for being considered for selection to higher post, was not tenable. Precisely for this reason, the Tribunal directed that the respondent be given promotion to the post of Senior Goods Guard from 18.11.2015, the date when his juniors were promoted to that post till his actual selection as Section Controller on 27.10.2016. The Tribunal further directed to re-compute the salary of the respondent for the above period and make him available the arrears within a stipulated period of time. 12. This has been challenged by the petitioners/Union of India, on the Page No.# 4/5 ground that according to the Rules in the Railways, the pay of a Railway servant, who happens to be promoted to 2(two) different posts carrying higher responsibilities on the same date, is to be regulated in the following manner: (i) He should be deemed to have been promoted first to the lower post and pay fixed under Rule 1316 (F.R.22-C) of RII, which post he should have held for a period not less than 22 days but for his promotion to the higher post. (ii) The person concerned should subsequently be promoted to higher post and pay fixed under Rule 1316 (F.R.22-C) with reference to the pay arrived at by the afore-mentioned computation process. 13. Though this issue was not raised before the Tribunal but on a plain reading of Railway Board’s orders with respect to fixation pay of Railway Servants who get promoted to 2(two) different posts carrying higher responsibilities, it appears that the above noted F.R. would not be applicable to the respondent. The post of Senior Goods Guard is not a selection post and a person is appointed on such post from amongst the Goods Guards by reckoning his seniority. 14. Admittedly, the respondent was the senior-most Goods Guard prior to his being finally selected as Section Controller. Precisely for this reason, the Tribunal directed for rectification of the service records of the respondent, holding that he would be entitled to the pay and emoluments of a Senior Goods Guard from date his juniors were promoted to that post till he became the Section Controller. 15. We find no anomaly in the order passed by the Tribunal for Page No.# 5/5 sustaining the objection of the petitioners/Railways. 16. The writ petition is dismissed accordingly. JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE Comparing Assistant