MOHAMMAD RASHID Vs. THE UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHALLENGING the order dated 25.2.2003 Annexure P/1 passed by Central Administrative Tribunal in O.A. No. 470/1998, petitioners have filed this writ petition.

(2.) PETITIONERS were departmental candidates who had participated in the process of selection for appointment to the post of Permanent Way Mistries. A notification for the selection was issued on 24.6.1997 and based on the selection process conducted for filling up of 50% post through departmental quota, petitioners were empanelled for appointment. It seems that when selection process was undertaken and panel was prepared, certain proceedings were initiated before the Central Administrative Tribunal by one Lallu Prasad and others in O.A. No. 304/1998 wherein the selection process was challenged. When the Central Administrative Tribunal considered this Original Application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunal's Act, 1985 it was found that a representation filed by Lallu Prasad and others challenging the selection was pending, therefore vide order dated 27.4.98 Annexure P/5, the Tribunal directed the Divisional Railway Manager to look into the representation and decide it. The Divisional Railway Manager went through the representation and found certain irregularity in the process of selection and therefore, cancelled the selection. As a consequence thereof, the present application was filed by the applicants, who were the empanelled candidates, before the Tribunal and the Tribunal having dismissed the same, the petitioners are before this Court.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner No. 3 referred to the statutory rules and tried to emphasize that the Divisional Railway Manager has no authority to cancel the panel prepared. It is contended that the Divisional Railway Manager by usurping the power cancelled the panel contrary to rules, it is said that entire action is unsustainable. That apart, he points out that procedural irregularity cannot be a ground for cancellation of panel.