Judgment R.M. Lodha, J.-The Railway has filed this writ petition aggrieved by the order dated 20.12.2000 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur whereby the Original Application filed by the present Respondent No. 1 has been allowed and the direction has been issued to place her as senior clerk w.e.f. 04.04.2989 in the seniority list of senior clerks. 2. The controversy arises thus : (a) Kumari Amrit Kaur Raj.-Respondent No. 1 (for short, the employee) was appointed on 011.1986 as Junior Clerk, on compassionate ground in Kota Division of Western Railway. (b) Railway Recruitment Board, in the year 1988, held the examination for direct recruitment of senior clerks against the service graduates quota. The employee appeared in the said examination and was declared successful. (c) On 112.1988, a list of successful candidates from amongst the service graduates of Kota division for recruitment to Class II posts (senior clerk) was published. The name of the employee appeared at Item No. 16 of the said list. By the said list, the selected candidates were asked to give three options for posting in Ajmer, Jaipur, Kota, Ratlam, Jodhpur and Bikaner Divisions/Units. (d) The employee sent communication to the Divisional Railway Manger, Kota on 112.1988 indicating her option for Kota division for posting and her lien. (e) By the office order dated 03.04.1989, the DRM, Kota issued an office order appointing nineteen persons in Class III service senior clerks in the scale of 1200-2040 (RP) Kota Division. In so far as the employee was concerned, she was posted in the office of Loco Foreman, Kota. (f) On 04.04.1989, the employee sent a representation to the Divisional Railway Manager (E), Western Railway, Kota stating therein that her group be changed from Mechanic, Operating, Commercial and General (for short, MOCG) to Works, Budget, Stores and Medical (for short, WBMS). She set to the reasons for change of her group. (g) On 18.04.1989, the office of Chief Engineer (Survey & Civil), Church Gate, Bombay sent a communication to the Deputy Chief Engineer (S & C) Kota that the employee may be retained as senior clerk in his office by upgrading the post of junior clerk and the Divisional Railway Manager (E), Kota he asked to maintain her lien a senior clerk on his Division. The Divisional Railway Manager (E), Kota was sent copy of the communication. The Divisional Railway Manager (E), Kota was sent copy of the communication. (h) The Deputy Chief Engineer (S & C), Kota issued an order being office Order No. 498 dated 20.04.1989 that the employee was being posted in his office in place of the office of Loco Foreman, Kota and that the said order shall be effective from 04.04.1989. Thus, the employee was posted to work as senior clerk in the office of the Deputy Chief Engineer (S & C), Kota. (i) On 29.09.1989, the Divisional Office, Kota issued an office order posting inter-alia, the employee in the office of Deputy Chief Engineer (S & C), Kota as senior clerk in the pay scale of 1200-2040 (RP). (j) The office of the Divisional Railway Manager issued a seniority list of senior clerks in the scale of 1200-2040 (RP) on 17.07.1991/22.07.1991, wherein the name of the employee was shown at 64 indicating her joining of duty on the working post of senior clerk on 02.09.1989. (k) Theemployee was up-set by the said seniority list and made representations. When nothing was heard from the authorities, she approached the Central Administrative Tribunal praying therein that the seniority list dated 17.07.1991/22.07.1991 be quashed and set aside an that the Railway Authorities may be directed to issue fresh seniority list by showing her name below Smt. Pushplata Dubey and above Mangi Lal whose names find place at Senior Nos. 9 and 10 in the seniority list of senior clerks. 3. The railway authoriti8es filed their reply in opposition to the Original Application. They set up the defence that the employee was posted in the office of Loco Foreman, Kota but she did not join there and made a representation on .04.04.1989 with a request to change her group from MOCG to WBSM; the change was accepted vide order dated 29.09.1989 an since the change was at the request of the employee, her date of joining has to be taken to be 29.09.1989 as per Paragraph 312 of the Indian Railway Establishment Manual. The railway authorities set up their case that the order of the Chief Engineer (S & C) Western Railway, Mumbai an order of the Deputy Chief Engineer (S & C), Kota cannot confer any right upon her. 4. The railway authorities set up their case that the order of the Chief Engineer (S & C) Western Railway, Mumbai an order of the Deputy Chief Engineer (S & C), Kota cannot confer any right upon her. 4. The Tribunal found substance in the contention of the employee in her challenge to the seniority list and, accordingly, vide its order dated 20.12.2000, as noticed above, directed the railway authorities to modify the seniority list by placing her in the list of senior clerks w.e.f. 04.04.1989. 5. The Counsel for the petitioners (Railway Authorities) assailed the order of the Tribunal and submitted that the employee was selected in Class-III post (senior clerk) by the Railway Recruitment Board for direct recruitment against the service graduate quote and since it was not a case of promotion, there was no question of the post of junior clerk being up-graded in the office of the Deputy Chief Engineer (S & C), Kota. The Counsel for the petitioners would submit that the Deputy Chief Engineer (S & C) has no authority or competence to pass the order of appointment or change of group and, therefore, the order dated 20.04.1989 passed by him was nullity and without authority. He submitted that MOCG and WBMS being two different groups one different establishments of the Railways and these two different establishments do not have common seniority list of senior clerks. Since her group from MOCG to MBMS was changed at her request by the order dated 29.09.1989, her entry into the Class III post cannot be reckoned from 04.04.1989 but has to be from 29.09.1989. The Counsel for the petitioners would, thus, contend that the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal was erroneous and deserved to be set aside. 6. On the other hand, Mr. R.N. Mathur, the Counsel for the employee supported the order of the Tribunal 7. That the employee was selected for Class III post (senior clerk) by the Railway Recruitment Board for direct recruitment against service graduates quota vide select list dated 112.1988 is not in dispute. That the Mechanical, Operation, Commercial General (MOCG) and Works, Budget, Stores and Medical (WBSM) are different groups is an admitted position. That the office of Loco Foreman falls in MOCG group and the office of the Deputy Chief Engineer (S & C) falls in WBSM is also not in dispute. That the Mechanical, Operation, Commercial General (MOCG) and Works, Budget, Stores and Medical (WBSM) are different groups is an admitted position. That the office of Loco Foreman falls in MOCG group and the office of the Deputy Chief Engineer (S & C) falls in WBSM is also not in dispute. That vide office order dated 03.04.1989 the applicant mad e a representation to the Divisional Railway Manager, Kota Division for change of her group from MOCG to WBSM is also an admitted position. That the Chief Engineer (S & C), Bombay asked the Deputy Chief Engineer (S & C), Kota by the letter dated 18.04.1989 to retain the employee as senior clerk in the pay scale of 1200-2040 (RP) in that office by up-grading the post of senior clerk is not in dispute. That the Divisional Railway Manager (E), Kota was asked by the said letter to maintain the lien of the employee as senior clerk in the scale of 1200-2040 (RP) on his Division is again an admitted position. That on 20.04.1989, the Deputy Chief Engineer (S & C), Kota issued an order posting the employee a senior clerk in his office in place of office of Loco Foreman, Kota is not disputed, and that the said order was effected from 04.04.1989 is an admitted position. That on 29.09.1989, the Divisional Office, Kota issued an order posting the employee in the office of the Deputy Chief Engineer (S & C), Kota is undisputed. In the back-drop of the afore-noticed admitted factual position, the question that falls for our determination is; is the date of joining on the post of Senior Clerk by the employee 04.04.1989 or 29.09.1989. 8. Chapter III of Indian Railway Establishment Manual Volume-I Revised Edition, 1989 provides for Rules regulating seniority of non-gazetted railway servants. Paragraph 302 is with regard to seniority in initial recruitment grades. We extract Paragraph 302 as it is : "302. Seniority in initial recruitment grades-Unless specifically stated otherwise, the seniority among the incumbents of a post in a grade is governed by the date of appointment to the grade. The grant of pay higher than the initial pay should not, as a rule, confer on a railway servant seniority above those who are already appointed against regular posts. Seniority in initial recruitment grades-Unless specifically stated otherwise, the seniority among the incumbents of a post in a grade is governed by the date of appointment to the grade. The grant of pay higher than the initial pay should not, as a rule, confer on a railway servant seniority above those who are already appointed against regular posts. In categories of posts partially filed by direct recruitment and partially by promotion, the criterion for determination of seniority should be the date of regular promotion after due process in the case of promote and the date of joining the working post after due process in the case of direct recruit, subject to maintenance of inter-so-seniority of promotes and direct recruits among themselves. When the date of entry into a grade of promoted railway servants and direct recruits are the same they should be put in alternate positions, the promotee being senior to the direct recruits, maintain inter-se-seniority of each group. Note.-In case the training period of a direct recruit is curtailed in the exigencies of service, the date of joining the working post in case of such a direct recruit shall be the date he would have normally come to a working post after completion of the prescribed period of training". 9. The determination of seniority of the candidates recruited through the Railway Recruitment Board is provided in Paragraph 303 which reads thus : "303. The seniority of candidates recruited through the Railway Recruitment Board or by any other recruiting authority should be determined as under- .(a) Candidates who are sent for initial training to training schools will rank in seniority in the relevant grade in the order of merit obtained at the examination held at the end of the training period before being posted against working posts. Those who join the subsequent courses for any reason whatsoever and those who pass the examination in subsequent chances, will rank junior to those who had passed the examination in earlier courses. .(b) In the case of candidate who do not have to undergo any training in training school, the seniority should be determined on the basis of the merit order assigned by the Railway Recruitment Board of other recruiting authority". 10. The seniority of the Railway Servants transferred at their own request is provided in Paragraph 312, Paragraph 312 provides thus : "312. 10. The seniority of the Railway Servants transferred at their own request is provided in Paragraph 312, Paragraph 312 provides thus : "312. Transfer on request-The seniority of railway servants transferred at their own request from one railway to another should be allotted bellow that of the existing confirmed, temporary an officiating railway servants in the relevant grade in the promotion group in the new establishment irrespective of the date of confirmation or length of officiating or temporary service of the transferred railway servants. Not e.-(i) This applies also to cases of transfer on request from one cadre/division to another cadre/division on the same railway. (ii) Theexpression relevant grade applies to grade where there is an element of direct recruitment. Transfers on request from Railway employees working in such grades may be accepted in such grades. No such transfers should be allowed in the intermediates grades in which all the posts are filled entirely in the intermediates grades in which all the posts are filled entirely by promotion by staff from the lower grade (s) and there is no element of direct recruitment". 11. The case of the Railway is founded on the ground that initially by the order dated 03.04.1989, on her selection, the employee was posted in the office of Loco Foreman, Kota (MOCG Group), but the change of group from MOCG to WBMS was done at her request by the order dated 29.09.1989 and, thus, by virtue of Paragraph 312, the seniority to the employee could be allotted below that of existing railway employee as on 29.09.1989 in the list of senior clerks. 12. Upon careful perusal of Paragraph 312, we are of the considered view that the provisions contained therein cannot be applied to the fact situation of the present case. The present case is not a transfer of the original applicant from one railway to another nor is a case of transfer from one cadre to another nor one Division to another. The request by the original applicant was for change of group i.e. from MOCG to WBSM. Such change of group though on request, is not covered by Paragraph 312. The case in hand has to be seen in the light of the provisions contained in Paragraph 302 and 303 of the Manual. The request by the original applicant was for change of group i.e. from MOCG to WBSM. Such change of group though on request, is not covered by Paragraph 312. The case in hand has to be seen in the light of the provisions contained in Paragraph 302 and 303 of the Manual. Clause (b) of Paragraph 303 provides that the seniority of the candidates recruited through the Railway Recruitment Board where the training in training school is not required to be undergone, has to be determined school is not required to be undergone, has to be determined on the basis of merit order assigned by the Railway Recruitment Board. As per Paragraph 302, inter-alia, in categories of posts, partially filled by direct recruitment and partially by promotion (the present case for Class III posts-senior clerks falls in this category), the criterion for determination of seniority in the case of promotees is the date of regular promotion after due process and the date of joining the working post after due process in the case of direct recruits. The selection of the employee by the Railway Recruitment Board for the post of senior clerk was for direct recruitment against service graduates and, therefore, the relevant date of seniority in the case of employee would be her date of joining the working post of senior clerk. It is true that pursuant to the order dated 03.04.1989, the employee was posted in the office of Loco Foreman, Kota (i.e. MOCG group from MOCG to WBSM. As a matter of fact, her request was acceded to by the Chief Engineer (S & C), Western Railway, Bombay and pursuant thereto on 20.04.1989, an order was issued by the Deputy Chief Engineer (S & C), Kota posting the employee in his office (WBSM group) in place of the office of Loco Foreman. It does appear and as a matter of fact it was not put in issue by the Counsel for the employee that the said order passed by the Deputy Chief Engineer was strictly not in conformity with his authority yet the fact of the matter is that the employee acted (she was bound to act) pursuant to that order and joined her duties as senior clerk in the office of the Deputy Chief Engineer (S & C). That the order dated 20.04.1989 was effective from 04.04.1989 is not in dispute and, therefore, her date of joining has to be treated as 04.04.1989. The order dated 29.09.1989 by the Divisional Railway Manager, Kota has to be seen as an order ratifying the act of Deputy Chief Engineer (S & C). 13. The relevant portion of the order dated 29.09.1989 on English translation reads thus : "Following clerks of pay scale of Rs. 950/1500 (RP) who were selected by the Railway Board in the pay scale of Senior Clerks Rs. 1200/2040 (RP) under the working quota of graduates and due to lack of working graduate quota in Work/Budget/Stores/Medical group and posted in this office in Mechanical/Transport/Commerce/General group by the letter under reference. As a result of availability of review of working graduate quota and other vacancies in present, these employees are again posted to their parental department/Budget/Stores/Medical groups in the pay scale of Senior Clerk Rs. 1200/2040 (RP) shown against their names. Name Present posting station/unit MOCG New posting unit (WBSM) 1. Pramod KumarSr. Clerk CPCR, Kota St. Clerk under Assistant S & T. Engineer, Bharatpur 2. Arun Kumar Sr. Clerk Loco, Kota Senior Divisional Electrical Engineer (BRS), Tuglakabad .3. Kumari Amritkaur Sr. Clerk Lock, Kota Deputy Chief Engineer (S & C), Kota 2. ShriRam Chandra Clerk in the pay scale of Rs. 950/1500 (RP) who has been working in the pay scale of Rs. 950/1500 (RP) under (S.S. & Telecommunication Engineer) is transferred in the present pay and pay scale in Ni.Ni. Bharatpur. 3. Theseemployees would hold their lien in further promotion/seniority in work/budget/store/medical group itself ". 14. It is apartment from the order 29.09.1989 that there was some mistake initially in the order dated 03.04.1989 in so far as computation of working quota of graduates in WBSM group was concerned and, accordingly, it was reviewed and in view of the vacancies available, the order was passed and the employee was posted in the office of Deputy Chief Engineer (S & C), Kota. 15. On a conjoint reading of the office orders dated 03.04.1989, 20.04.1989 and 29.09.1989, we find that the view taken by the Central Administrative Tribunal is possible view and does not deserve to be interfered with in extraordinary jurisdiction. 16. The writ petition is dismissed with no order as to costs.