PAWAN KUMAR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is aggrieved by the fact that his original application being OA No. 2865/2010 was rejected by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi by virtue of its order dated 24.10.2011.

(2.) THE petitioner (Pawan Kumar) was a candidate for the post of Assistant Station Master (ASM). An advertisement had been issued for the same on 7.6.2008. That advertisement was for 53 posts of ASMs for the Ambala Division. The petitioner, like many others, had applied in response to the said advertisement. Page 1 of 8 The petitioner, however, was not within the top 53 candidates and his name was placed in the list of extra candidates. It is an admitted position that the petitioner's name in order of merit was at Sl. No. 5 in the said list of extra candidates. It was contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that although 53 posts of ASMs had been earmarked for the Ambala Division, 18 out of these 53 posts were diverted to the Delhi division. This meant that out of the 53 persons, who were selected, only 35 of the candidates would be posted in the Ambala Division, and therefore, there remained a vacancy of 18 posts within Ambala Division. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner ought to have been considered for these 18 vacancies. He further pointed out that out of the 53 persons who were initially selected against the 53 posts which had been advertised, two persons did not clear the medical test and two did not join. This meant that there were four vacancies even in respect of the 53 posts which had been advertised.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the respondents also submitted that the list of 53 candidates which had been received from the Railway Recruitment Board (Chandigarh) had been distributed between the Ambala Division (35) and Delhi (18) with the approval of CP/NR (Competent Authority).