Holding

The DG order of 17 August 1983 does not require all ATMs to be reverted; 85% of the existing ATMs are to be upgraded to LSGTM based on seniority, and only the surplus 15% may be reverted to Telegraphist.

Summary

The appellants, who were Assistant Telegraph Masters (ATMs) in the Posts & Telegraphs Department, were reverted to the post of Telegraphist under the Director‑General's order of 17 August 1983, which also provided that 85% of ATM posts would be upgraded to Lower Scale Telegraph Masters (LSGTMs) and the remaining 15% abolished. The appellants challenged the reversion, claiming entitlement to the upgraded LSGTM posts based on their inter‑se seniority as Telegraphists. The Central Administrative Tribunal allowed the reversion but rejected the claim to the upgraded posts. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined the wording of the DG order and held that it did not require all ATMs to be reverted; only the surplus 15% could be reverted, while the 85% eligible ATMs were to be considered for promotion to LSGTM on the basis of seniority. Consequently, the appellants were entitled to be considered for the upgraded posts. The Court set aside the Tribunal’s order and allowed the appeal.

Issues considered

The proper construction of the Director‑General's order dated 17 August 1983 regarding the merger of the ATM cadre into the LSGTM cadre
Whether the order mandates that all Assistant Telegraph Masters be reverted to Telegraphist and that promotions to LSGTM be made solely from Telegraphists
Whether the 85% upgraded LSGTM posts are to be filled by ATMs based on their inter‑se seniority as Telegraphists
Whether the reversion of ATMs to Telegraphist is limited to the surplus 15% due to non‑availability of LSGTM posts
Whether the rights of existing Telegraphists for promotion to LSGTM are adversely affected by the up‑gradation

Legislation cited

Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985s. 29

Subjects

service lawcadre mergerpromotionseniorityadministrative interpretationPosts & TelegraphsCentral Administrative Tribunalgovernment employment

Judgment

A R. K. SINHA AND ORS.
V.
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

DECEMBER 20, 1991

B [L. M. SHARMA, J. S. VERMA· AND S. C. AGRAWAL, JJ.]

ServiceLaw:

'Posts & Telegraphs Service Rules:

C Director General P & T's letter dated 17.8.1983---Upgradation &
Merger of Assistant Telegraph Masters into the cadre of Lower Scale Tele-
graph Masters-Effect of .

In the department of Posts & Telegraphs, Government of India,
prior to 1973, in between the cadres of Telegraphists and Telegraph
D Masters (TMS) there were some 'allowanced posts' of Assistant Telegraph
Masters (ATMS) appointment to which was made on the basis of senior-
ity-cum-fitness from amongst the telegraphists who wanted to volunteer
for such posts and they were paid a monthly allowance as special pay. The
Third Pay Commission revised, with effect from 1.1.1973, the pay scales
E of telegraphists to Rs. 260-480/- and for TMs it recommended two scales-
one of Rs. 425-640/- for Lower Scale Grade Telegraph Masters (LSGTMS)
and the other of Rs. 550-750/- for Higher Scale Grade Telegraph Masters
(HSGTMS). For ATMs in lieu of special pay, the pay Commission recom-
mended a pay scale of Rs. 380-560. Accordingly, the P&T Board issued an
order dated 9.8.1974 to the effect that the cadre of ATMs to be borne in
F the pay scale of Rs. 380-560 with effect from l.l.1973 would be treated as
a new cadre for all intents and purposes. However, no rules in this regard
were framed and the appointments continued to be regulated by the
existing rules and the orders/letters issued from time to time by the P&T
Board and the Director General, P&T.

G In order to rationalise the cadres in the P&T Department, a Com- ,
mittee on Telecommunication was constituted which submitted its report
in 1982 recommending that cadres of ATMs and TMs may be merged by
suitably increasing the posts of TMs. Accordingly the Director General,
P&T issued an order dated 17.8.1983 providing that the cadre of ATMs
may be merged and 85%posts of ATMs may be upgraded to that of
H LSGTM and balance of 15% of the posts may be abolished and surplus

524
R.K. SINHA v. U.0.1. 525

r ATMs may be reverted as Telegraphists. It was also directed that promo- A
~~'
tion of ATMs to LSGTMs ·posts would be on the basis of existing rules in
the case of existing ATMs eligible to be promoted as LSGTMs by virtue

.. of their seniority as telegraphists, and that their promotion as LSGTMs
straight from the post of ATM would not involve assumption of duties and
responsibilities of greater importance. Consequently the appellants who
were working as ATMs since the years 1967-1982, were reverted to the B
posts of Telegraphists whereas the persons working as Telegraphists were
appointed on the upgraded posts of LSGTM.
_/

The appellants challenged their reversion and claimed appointment
to the upgraded posts of LSGTM. The Central Administrative Tribunal
allowed their claim so far as it related to reversion and held that the c
appellants were entitled to continue as ATMs; but as regards their
appointment to upgraded posts of LSGTMs, the Tribunal rejected t.fie
claim.

In appeal by special leave to this Court, it was contended on behalf
of the appellants that the. effect of the· Director General's· order dated D
-I
17.8.1983 was that amongst the persons holding the posts or'ATMs on the
date of the order 85% were to be selected for posting on upgraded posts
of LSGTM on the basis of their inter se seniority as telegraphists and the
order. could not be construed to mean that all the ATMs would stand
reverted to the post of telegraphists and from amongst telegraphists
promotion would be made on the basis of seniority in the cadre of E
Telegraphists against the 85% posts of ATMs which had been upgraded
asLSGTMs.
Allowing the appeal, this Court,
HELD: 1.1 The letter dated 17.8.1983 cannot be construed to mean
....... that all ATMs have to be reverted as Telegraphists and from amongst
F
Telegraphists promotions would be made for 85% upgraded posts of
LSGTMs. The view taken by the Tribunal was not correct.
..._ [pp. 532 B,C; H; 533 A]
.c
',,
of
1.2 The reversion ATMs to the posts of Telegraphists was to be G
done only on account of non-availability of LSGTM posts because all the
posts of ATMs were not being upgraded and only 85% were being
upgraded and the balance 15% posts were being abolished. [p. 532 EF]

l.3 After the creation of a separate p·ay scale of Rs. 385-560 with
effect from January 1, 1973 for ATMs on the basis of the recommenda- H
526 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1991) SUPP. 3 S. C.R.

A tions of the Third Pay Commission, a new cadre of ATMs was created by
order August 9, 1974; and by letter dated 17.8.1983 the cadre of ATMs was
to be merged into that of LSGTMs by upgrading 85% posts of ATMs as
LSGTMs and abolishing the balance of 15% posts of ATMs.
[pp. 531 GH; 532A]

B 1.4 By the order dated August 17, 1983 it was envisaged that from
amongst the existing ATMs 85% would be retained and posted against the
upgraded posts of LSGTMs and only the surplus 15% would be reverted
.(_
as Telegraphists. It also provided that there would be promotion of ATMs
to the posts of LSGTMs straight and the criterion for such promotion
would be seniority in the gradation list of Telegraphists. [p. 532 B-D]
c
2.1 The rights of existing Telegraphists for promotion to the posts of
LSGTMs were not adversely affected _by the upgradation and the upgra-
dation was only limited to the persons who were holding the posts of ATMs
on the date of the passing of the order dated August 17, 1983. [p. 532 GH]

D 2.2 The only effect of the order dated August 17, 1983 would.be that
A TMs who were selected for promotion as LSGTMs would be placed in ...
I
the scale of LSGTMs but that would not make them senior to the
Telegraphists who were senior to them but were promoted as LSGTMs .
subsequently because on promotion such Telegraphists would regain their
seniority in the cadre of LSGTMs. [p. 533 CD]
E 2.3 The selection for the purpose of appointment on the 85%
upgraded posts of ATMs as LSGTMs had to be made from amongst
persons who were working as ATMs on the August 17, 1983 and the said -<---
selection was to be niade on the basis of their inter se seniority as
Telegraphists. [p.533 AB]
F 2.4 The appellants are entitled to be considered along with other ~
ATMs for posting against the 85% upgraded post'i of ATMs as LSGTMs
on the basis of their inter se seniority in the cadre of Telegraphists.
[p. 533 E] ;..

. _r
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION·: Civil Appeal No. 2033of1991. ~
G
From the Judgment and Order dated 28.2.1989 of.the Central Adminis-
trative Tribunal, Allahabad in Registration T.A.No. 1483 of 1987.

Sunil K.Gupta and H.K.Puri for the Appellants.
H J.DJain, Ms. Kitty Kumar Manglam and Ms. Sushm:a Suri for the
Respondents.
R.K. SINHA v. U.0.1. [AGRAWAL, J.] 527

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by A

S.C. AGRA WAL, J. In the Posts & Telegraphs Department of .the
Goverment of India, there were earlier two cadres: (i) Telegraphists in the pay
scale of Rs. 110-240, and (ii) Telegraph Masters (for short 'TMs') in the pay
scale of Rs. 210-380. There were certain posts known as 'allowanced posts' of
Assistant Telegraph Masters (ATMs), Testing Telegraphists (TILs) and Tele- B
printer Supervisors (TPSs). Appointments to these allowanced posts were
made from amongst Telegraphists on the basis of selection through a depart-
' ·' mental examination and the selected candidates were required to undergo a
training for a period of two months. They were paid an allowance (special pay)
of Rs. 30 per month. In 1968 as a result of reorganisation, 75% of the
allowanced posts of TILs, TPSs and ATMs were merged into the post of ATM C
and the remaining 25% posts were abolished. Selection/appointment for the
post of ATM was thereafter made on the basis of seniority-cum-fitness from
amongst Telegraphists who wanted to volunteer for such post. The requirement
of training of two months was continued. The Telegraphists were entitled to
extra benefits in the shape of incentives to which the ATMs were not entitled.
The Third Pay Commission recommended revision of the pay scales of D
Telegraphists to Rs. 260-480. For TMs, the Pay Commission recommended
two scales-a scale of Rs. 425-640 for Lower Scale Grade Telegraph Masters
(LSGTMs) and a scale of Rs. 550-750 for Higher Scale Grade Telegraph
Masters (HSGTMs) .. The Pay Commission also recommended a pay scale of
Rs. 380-560 for ATMs in lieu of the special pay which was given to them for E
the reason that the said post was not held on tenure basis and that they also
relieve the TMs of routine supervisory duties regarding disposal of traffic. The
recommendations of the Third Pay Commission were brought into force with
effect from January 1, 1973. Consequent to the aforesaid recommendations of
the Third Pay Commission, the P&T Board issued the order dated August 9,
1974, whereby it was decided "that the cadre of Assistant Telegraph Masters F
to be borne in the pay scale of Rs. 380-560 with effect from January 1, 1973
will be treated as a new cadre for all intents and purposes". In the said order,
it was also stated that the recruitment rules for this new cadre of ATMs would
follow in due course. It appears that the recruitment rules were not made.

In order to improve the avenues of promotion for Telegraphist<; to the G
post of TM, the P&T Board, by their order dated June 16, 1974, decided to
increase the posts ofLSGTM in the pay scale of Rs. 425-640 to the extent of
20% of •'1e posts of Telegraphists by conversion of existing time scale posts.
By letter of the Director-General of Posts & Telegraphs dated November 29,
1978, it was' intimated that the cadre of ATMs'created with effect from January
1, 1973 in the pay scale of Rs. 380-560 under letter dated August 9, 1974 would H
528 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1991) SUPP. 3 S. C.R.

A continue as at present and Telegraphists would be promoted as ATMs from 'r
amcmgst the volunteering Telegraphists as per the existing instructions issued
from time to time. It was fruther decided that 20% of LSGTM posts will be
'-'• r-
determined on the.basis of the combined strength of ATMs and Telegraphists '
and further that ATMs would be considered for appointment to the grade of f'._
LSGTM based on their seniority in the gradation list of Telegraphists. By letter
B dated May 30, 1979, the Director-General of P&T directed that those ad hoc
ATMs who were selected according to the instructions contained in the office
letters dated November 12, 1969 and March 29, 1971 and were given only
abridged on the job training should now be given regular training and made ~ '
regular ATMs.
[
c By letter dated August 7, 1980, the Director-General of P&T directed
that ATMs would be considered for appointment to the grade of LSGTM based
on their seniority in the gradation list of Telegraphists as per his order dated .
November 29, 1979 and that once ATMs were confirmed as such they would
lose the right to have the lien on the posts of Telegraphists and hence could not ;
-").--
be considered for promotion to the cadre of LSGTM and that it has been
D decided that existing incumbents may not be confirmed as ATMs till further
orders from his office. t
A Committee on Telecommunication, known as'Sarin Committee', was
constituted for rationalisation of cadres in the Ministry of Telecommunica-
lions, Department of P & T. The said Committe submitted its report in .1982
E wherein it was recommended that the cadre of ATMs and TMs may be merged
by suitably increasing the posts of TMs for the reason that the creation of this
ad hoc.intermediate cadre of ATMs had created unnecessary compartmentali- ~J
sationof functions with consequent problems of coordination and there was no \---
reason why this work could not be entrusted to TMs. In pursuance to the
F aforesaid report of the Sarin Committee, order dated August 17, 1983 was
passed by the Director-General of P&T whereby it was decided that the cadre
of ATMs in the pay scale of Rs. 380-560 may be merged and 85% of the
1,
existing sanctioned posts of ATMs may be upgraded to that of LSGTM in the
pay scale of Rs. 425-640 and the balance of 15% of the posts of ATMs may .... r:-

G
be abolished and the surplus A TMs be reverted ~ Telegraphists against
existing/future vacancies of telegraphists. By the said order, it was directed that -r,.,.. ,..
¢
the promotion of ATMs to that of LSGTM would be on the basis of existing
rules, in .the case of existing ATMs, who were eligible to be promoted as
LSGTMs by virtue of their seniority as Telegraphists and that their promotion
as LSGTMs straight from the post of ATMs would not involve assumption of
l~
- .J

duties or responsibilities of greater importance and that on upgradation of the
H eligible ATMs·to the posts of LSGTMs, the incumbents may be given an \
(
.....,

\-
R.K. SINHA v. U.0.1. [AGRAWAL, J.] 529

additional one month's training on Telegraph Traffic instruments as they had A
4 already received two mont11s training as ATMs.

The appellants were appointed as Telegraphists during the period 1952
to 1967 and they were appointed as ATMs during the years 1967 to 1982. They
were posted in the U.P.Circle. On the basis of the order of Direetor-General of
P&T dated August 17, 1983, the General Manager Telecom, U.P.Circle, B
Lucknow passed an order dated March 2, 1984 whereby the appellants were
reverted to the post of Telegraphist and persons who were working as
~ Telegraphists were ap~oirited on the upgraded posts of LSGTM.

Feeling aggrieved by the said order, the appellants filed a writ petition in
the Allahabad High Court which was transferred to the Central Administrative C
Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as 'The Tribunal') under section 29 of the
Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985. The Tribunal, by itsjudgment and order
dated February 28, 1989, partly allowed the application of the appellants to the
extent that the reversion of the appellants was qua<;hed and it was held that they
were entitled to continue as ATMs and draw the pay scale of the said posts but
the Tribunal rejected the claim of the appellants for appointment on the D
: ~ upgraded posts of LSGTMs on the basis of the order dated August 17, 1983.
The present appeal is directed against the said order of the Tribunal.

The appeal raises questions as lo interpretation of the letter of the
Director-General of P&T dated August 17, 1983, which reads as und~r:
E
"Subject: Merger of the cadre of ATMs into that of LSGTMs as
per COT recommendations.

Sir,

I am directed to say that in pursuance of the report of F
Committee on Telecommunication the question of merger of the
cadre of Asst. Telegraph Masters into that of LSG Telegraph
Masters has been under consideration of this office for some time
past.
G
\
... 2. That P&T Board is now pleased to decide that the cadre of
ATMs, in the pay scale of Rs. 380-560, may be merged and 85%
of the existing sanctioned post of ATMs may be upgraded to that
of LSG Telegraph Masters, in the pay scale of Rs. 425-640. The
Heads of Circles may sanction the requisite posts of LSGTMs, to
the extent of 85% of the existing sanctioned strength of A TMs H
530 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1991] SUPP. 3 S. C.R.

A under them and abolish the balance 15% posts of ATMs, by
reverting, if necessary, the surplus ATMs as Telegraphists against
existing/future vacancies of telegraphists.

3. The promotion of ATMs to that of LSGTMs would be on the
basis of existing rules. In the case of existing ATMs, who are
B <?ligible to be promoted as LSGTMs by virtue of their seniority as
Telegraphists, their promotion as LSGTMs straight from the post
of ATM would not involve assumption of duties or responsibilities
of greater importance. Their pay would be fixed under FR 22(a)(ii) ':"-
i.e. at the same stage as in the pay scale of ATMs, if that stage is
available otherwise, at the lower stage treating the difference as
c personal pay to be absorbed in future incumbents.

4. On upgradation of the eligible ATMs to the posts of LSG
Telegraph Masters the incumbents may be given an additional one
month's training on Telegraph Traffic instruments as they had
• already received two months training as ATMs.
D
5. The present pay of such ATMs, who get reverted due to non- f
availability of LSG. Telegraph Master posts, may be protected by
grant of personal pay to be absorbed against future increase in pay.
On promotion the pay of such employees should be fixed under
normal rules with reference to their pay as Telegraphists.
E
6. In future the posts of LSG Telegraph Masters for looking after
the work of ATMs, may continue to be sanctioned by heads of
Circles till revised norms are evolved by IWSU/SIU, within their
own powers, to the extent of 85% of number of posts/justified as
per norms prescribed for ATMs vide this office letter No. 19-20/
F
80-TE.II dated 4.10.80 such posts will be over and above the 20%
functional posts of LSG Telegraph Masters which will be sanc-
tioned by the Circle. In order to ensure that the 15% reduction is
actually made effective while sanctioning the posts of LSG Tele-
graph Masters in lieu of posts of ATMs annual review of all the
G CTOs/DTOs should first be completed and thereafter only addi-
tional posts of LSG Telegraph Masters found justified at 85% of
the norms applicable to ATMs should be sanctioned on circle
basis."

Shri Sunil Gupta, the learned counsel for the appellants, has ·urged that
H as a result of the said order, 85% of the existing sanctioned posts of ATMs were
R.K. SINHAv. U.01. [AGRAWAL, J.] 531

~- upgraded to that ofLSGTMs i~ the pay scale of RS. 425-640 and the balance A
..,i 15% posts of ATMs were abolished with the result that amongst persons who
were holding the posts of ATMs on that date 85% were to be selected for
posting on the upgraded post of LSGTM on the basis of their inter se seniority
as TEiegraphists and the remaining 15% ATMs who were not so selected were
to be reverted to the post of Telegraphists though on reversion they would
continue to receive the emoluments which they were drawing on the postS of B
ATMs: The submission of the learned counsel was that the seniority as
Telegraphists was only to be taken into consideration amongst the ATMs who
~ were to be selected for the upgraded posts of LSGTMs and the said order dated
August 17, 1983 cannot be construed to mean that all the ATMs would stand
reverted to the post of Telegraphist and from amonst Telegraphists promotion
would be made on the basis of seniority in the Cadre of Telegraphists on the C
1
85% posts of ATMs which had been upgraded as LSGTMs.

Shri J.D;-fain, the learned counsel for the respondents, on the other hand,
has argued that the cadre of ATMs was only an ad hoc cadre and persons who
were holding the post of ATMs prior to August 17, 1983 were retaining their
lien on the post of Telegraphists and that they could be promoted to the post D
ofLSGTM only on the basis of their seniority in the cadre of Telegraphists and
that on account of upgradation of 85% posts of ATMs as LSGTMs appoint-
ment on the said upgraded posts could only be made from amongst Telegra-
phists on the basis of their seniority in that cadre and the appellants could not
claim to be appointed on the said upgraded posts by virtue of their being ATMs
:m the date of passing of the order dated August 17, 1983. Shri Jain has, in this E
;onnec'tion, placed reliance on the words "the promotion of ATMs to that of
LSGTMs would be on the basis of existing rules," in paragraph 3 of the Jetter
Jf August 17; 1983 and also on the letter of the Director-General of P&T dated
~ovember 29, 1978 whereby it was directed that ATMs would be considered
for appointment to the grade of LSGTMs based on their seniority in the F
gradation list of Telegraphists.

It is not disputed by the learned counsel that there were no statutory rules
governing the matter of appointment on the posts of ATM or for promotion
from the post of ATM to the post of LSGTM and the matter was governed by
administrative orders. It appears that after the creation of a separate pay scaJe G
of Rs. 385-560 with effect from January 1, 1973 for ATMs on the basis of the
recommendations of the Third Pay Commission, a new cadre of ATMs was
created by order August 9, 1974. Subsequently on the basis of the recommen-
dations of the Sarin Committee, it was decided by letter dated August 17, 1983,
that the cadre of ATMs in the pay scafo of Rs. 380-560 be merged into that of
LSpTMs by upgrading 85% posts of ATMs to that ofLSGTMs and abolishing H

,.

/
532 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1991) SUPP. 3 S. C.R.

\.
A the balance 15% of the said pOsts of ATMs. The merger of cadre of ATMs with
that of LSGTMs as envisaged in the letter dated August 17. 1983 could be '-'·
effected in two ways: by reverting all existing ATMs as Telegraphists and pro-
moting from amongst Telegraphists to the 85% upgraded posts of LSGTMs. as
suggested by the respondents 0r by retaining 85% ATMs and posting them on
the upgraded posts of LSGTMs and reverting the balance 15% ~ Telegra-
B phists. as submitted by the appellants. In paragraph 2 of the letter dated August
17~ 1983. it has been stated "and abolish the balance 15% of posts of ATM. by
reverting. if necessary. the surplus ATMs as Telegraphists against existing/
future vacancies of Telegraphists". This would mean that by order dated
·Augilst 17. 1983. it was envisaged that from amongst the existing A'fMs 85%
would be retained and posted against the upgraded posts of LSGTMs and only
the swplus 15% would be reverted as Telegraphists. Paragraph 3 of die letter
c dated August 17. 1983 prescribes the manner of selectio11 of these SS% of
ATMs for the purpose of posting as LSGTMs. It cannot be construed to mean
that all ATMs have to be reverted. as Telegraphists and from amongst Telegra-
'

phists promotions would be made for 85% upgraded posts of LSGTMs. In
paragraph 3, which provides that "the promotion of. ATMs, to that of LSGTMs
would be on the basis of existing rules, in the case of existing ATMs, who .are
D eligible to re J!'ft>moted as LSGTMs by virtue of their seniority as Telegra-
phists, their promotion as LSGTMs straight for the post of ATM would not in- I
volve assumption of duties or responsibilities of greater importance", it is
envisaged that there would be promotion of ATMs to that of LSGTMs straight
and that the critertion for such promotion would be seniority in the gradation
list of Telegraphists as envisaged in the earlier order dated November 29, 1978
E wherein it was provided that ATMs were eligible for promotion as .LSGTMs
on the basis of their seniority in the gradation list of Telegraphists. This is also
clear from paragraph S of the letter dated August 17, 1983 wherein it is stated
"the present pay of such ATMs who get reverted due to non-availability of
LSGTM posts, may be. protected. .....~·. This indicates that the reversion of
ATMs to the posts of Telegraphists was to be done only on account of non-
F availability of LSGTM posts because all the postss of ATMs were not beinP
upgraded and only 85% posts were being upgraded and the balance 15% posts
were being abolished. In paragraph 6 of the letter dated August 17, 1983 it is
provided that the 85% upgraded posts would be over and above 20% functional
;.-
posts of LSGTMs sa_nctioned as per norms laid down in letter of Director-Gen-

G
eral of P&T dated October 4, 1980 which means that the 20% posts of
LSGTMs which were meant for Telegraphists would not, in any way, be
-r-- ~
affected by the upgradation of 85% posis of ATMs as LSGTMs: In other
words, the rights of existing Telegraphists for promotion to the the posts of
LSGTMs were not adversely affected by the upgradation and the upgradation
was only limited to the persons who _were holding the posts of ATMs on the
date of the passing of the order dated August 17, 1983. The Tribunal was not
·H
R.K. SINHA v. U.0.1. [AGRAWAL, J.] 533

right in talcing the view that as a result of the order dated August 17, 1983 all A
the ATMs were liable to be reverted to the posts of Telegraphists and after such
reversion· they were to be considered for promotion to the posts of LSGTMs
against 85% upgraded posts ofLSGTMs along with all the Telegraphists on the
basis of their seniority in the cadre of Telegraphists. In our opinion, the selec-
tion for the purpose of appointment on the 85% ungraded posts of ATMs as
. LSGTMs had to be made from amongst persons who were working as ATMs B
on the August 17, 1983 and the said selection was to be made on the basis of
their inter se seniority as Telegraphists.

In this context, it may also be mentioned that in his letter dated January
27, 1984, the Assistant Director-General (Stn.), P&T, has clarified his instruc-
tions contained in the letter dated November 29, 1978 making ATMs eligible C
for promotion to the LSGTMs cadre and he has stated that seniority in the cadre
of LSGTMs promoted either directly or from the cadre of ATMs is fixed on the
basis of their relevant seniority in the cadre of telegraphists and the question
of their promotion to LSGTMs earlier or later does not have any relevance so
far as their seniority is concerned. This indicates that the only effect of the order
dated August 17, 1983 would be that ATMs who are selected for promotion as D
LSGTMs would be placed in the scale of LSGTMs but that would not make
them senior to the Telegraphists who were senior to them but were promoted
as LSGTMs subsequently because on promotion such Telegraphists would
regain their seniority in the cadre of LSGTMs.

The appeal is consequently allowed, the judgment and order of .the E
Tribunal dated February 28, 1989 in T.A.No. 1483 of 1987 is set aside and it
is held that the appellants are entitled to be considered along with other ATMs
for posting against the 85% upgraded posts of ATMs as LSGTMs on the basis
of their inter se seniority in the cadre of Telegraphists. There will be no orders
as to costs.

R.P. Appeal allowed.