UNION OF INDIA Vs. NAGENDRA KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

(2.) This writ petition has been filed challenging the validity and correctness of the judgment and order dated 5.9.2006 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Allahabad Bench, Allahabad (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') in Original Application No. 464 of 2004, Nagendra Kumar versus Union of India and others, by which the aforesaid OA was allowed.

(3.) Brief facts of the case are that respondent no.1, who belongs to a Scheduled Tribe Community, was duly selected by the Railway Recruitment Board, Allahabad ( hereinafter referred to as 'the RRB') for admission to the Vocational Course in Railway Commercial Department (hereinafter referred to as the 'VCRC'), job-linked two years course conducted in 20 schools across the country, which are affiliated to the Central Board of Secondary Education. Respondent no.2 was selected by the RRB against a Scheduled Tribe seat in the VCRC after he was found to have passed the entrance test and the class X examination conducted by the State Educational Board securing required marks in both the examinations. The total number of seats in the VCRC at the school allotted to the applicants were 40 and admissions on these seats were made in accordance with the quota earmarked for different categories i.e. General/SC/ST candidates as per the reservation percentages prescribed under the Constitution. Thus, total number of posts available for being filled at the end of the course were 40 and these posts were to be filled up by observing the rules of reservation. It was precisely for this reason that admissions to the VCRC were also made observing the rules of reservation. According to the scheme, while the candidates belonging to the General category were required to secure a minimum of 55% marks at the end of the VCRC in order to have offered appointment whereas 45% marks were required to be obtained by candidates belonging to SC/ST category, that is to say, all candidates securing the minimum marks fixed for their particular category, were assured of being offered appointment in the Commercial Department of Railways. However, respondent no.1 could secure only 40.8% marks at the conclusion of the course and was, therefore, not offered any appointment. He moved representation raising his grievance before the authority concerned, which was rejected vide order dated 13.2.2003. Aggrieved, respondent no.1 filed O.A. No. 464 of 2004 aforesaid before the Tribunal, which was allowed vide judgment and order dated 5.9.2006, hence the instant writ petition has been filed challenging the judgment and order dated 5.9.2006 aforesaid.