ARVIND KUMAR DEO Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE writ petitioners claim to be qualified persons who have been working in the Eastern Railway as Trackman which is Grade 'D' post. It is their contention that after long years of service they got a chance as per notification dated 15/03/2010 for formation of a panel for the post of Senior Supervisor (P. Way) in the Engineering Department through the process of Limited Departmental Competitive Examination (for short referred to as LDCE). The petitioners being the eligible candidates were selected to appear for the written examination which was held on 27/11/2010. Further contention of the petitioners is that the result of the said examination was not published for a long time but it was learnt that the selection for the post of Senior PWS has been cancelled by the competent authority on the ground of procedural defect and that it was ordered to process the above selection further as a 'fresh assessed vacancy'. According to the petitioners, they had secured qualifying marks in the written test held on 27/11/2010 and their names had been listed as successful candidates. In spite of this, the respondents had published another notification on 24/10/2011 inviting applications for the post of Senior Supervisor (P. Way) in the engineering department through the process of LDCE. The cancellation of the selection in response to notification issued on 15/03/2010 was malafide as no reason was assigned by the respondents as required by the judgment and order of Central Administrative Tribunal, Allahabad Bench dated 21/03/2002 passed in O.A 359/2001 and the Ministry of Railways, Rail Mantralaya (Rail Board) circular dated 03/07/2002. With these assertions the writ petitioners filed the Original Application No. 1041 of 2011 before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Calcutta Bench praying for a direction upon the respondents to give promotion to the successful candidates from Group 'D' to Group 'C' as per notification dated 15/03/2010. The petitioners also sought for a direction upon the respondents to cancel, withdraw or rescind the subsequent notification dated 24/10/2011 regarding the self -same matter.

(2.) ADMITTING the fact that the petitioners are employees of Eastern Railway working as Trackman, the respondents countered in their reply before the Tribunal as well as in their affidavit in opposition filed in this Court that the result of the written examination was not declared and the panel was not published as there was violation of Railway Board's norms (CPO/KKK's Serial No. 217 of 1999) and the guidelines for selection which state that at least 10% of total marks prescribed in the written test should be on the official language policy and rules. The respondents also did not dispute that the selection made as per notification dated 15/03/2010 was cancelled due to procedural defects and this was intimated to the Senior Divisional Engineer (Co -ordination), Howrah, and all the departments under Howrah Division, Eastern Railway. Therefore there was no ill motive on the part of respondents to hold fresh selection process by issuing another notification dated 24/10/2011 in response to which applications have been received from the staff of Engineering Department of Howrah Division as well as from the petitioners. In spite of having their names in the list of eligible candidates for the fresh selection process the petitioners filed Original Application No. 1041 of 2011 before the Tribunal.

(3.) THE Central Administrative Tribunal dismissed the original application vide order dated 30/07/2013 with the following observation: