DARSHAN PAL Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer for quashing order dated 25.3.2010 (P.7) passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh (for brevity ' the Tribunal') dismissing OA No. 512 HR of 2008. He had approached the Tribunal by filing OA with a prayer for quashing order dated 5.8.2008 passed by the Sr. Divisional Personnel Officer, Northern Railways, Ambala Cantt. setting aside the selection for promotion to the post of Driver Passenger in the grade of Rs. 5500-9000 in Mechanical (O&F) Department from the post of Loco Pilot. It is appropriate to mention that some of the petitioners have been working as Sr. Loco Pilot (Goods) in the scale of Rs. 5500-9000 whereas the others are working as Loco Pilot (Goods) in the pay scale of Rs. 5000-8000. THE promotional post of Driver Passenger is in the pay scale of Rs. 5500-9000. On 18.2.2008, the respondents had conducted a selection process for the post of Driver Passenger. THE selection was to be made on the basis of viva-voce test. THE selection for promotion to the post in question was to be made on the basis of merit-cum-seniority. A provisional panel was prepared on 27.5.2008 with the name of 85 persons proposing to promote them to the post of Driver Passenger in Mechanical (O&F) Department. Before the Tribunal, the petitioner alleged that certain persons filed OA No.1242 of 2008 with the assertion that the selection was to be conducted on the basis of selection-cum-merit principle and allegations were levelled that those who have been empanelled were either not eligible or had bad record. Disciplinary proceedings were alleged to be pending against them or they had suffered punishment and that the earlier selection was prepared on the basis of seniority and good record of service.

(2.) THE principal Bench of the Tribunal at New Delhi issued notice for 10.6.2008 with a direction to the respondents to file reply. THE Tribunal also issued interim order that appointment, if any, made would be subject to the decision of the aforesaid application.

(3.) THE Tribunal after considering the reply and rejoinder has referred to the irregularities in the selection as per the report received with the recommendation of the Divisional Railway Manager. THE report has been quoted by the Tribunal which reads thus: *A few junior Loco Pilots (Goods) who have not even completed 2 years of service have passed for promotion of Loco Pilot (Passenger). *Senior Loco Pilots have not passed the exam even though there is no adverse remark in their CRs. *A few senior most SC candidates have failed, while junior SC candidates who have not even completed 2 years service, have been considered suitable for empanelment.