ANIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is directed against the order dated 6.11.2003 (Annexure-15), passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna, in O.A. No. 533 of 2003 (Anil Kumar Shrivastava v. Union of India and Ors.), whereby the original application preferred by the present writ petitioner has been rejected.

(2.) A brief statement of facts essential for the disposal of the writ petition may be indicated. The respondent authorities had issued an advertisement way back in 1992, inviting applications from eligible candidates for appointment to the post of Probationary Assistant Station-Master, which is in the non-technical category of the Indian Railways. The petitioner was one such applicant, and he appeared at the written test held on 12.12.1993. He also appeared in the viva-voce test and psychological test on 4.3.1994. The respondent authorities forwarded their communication dated 28.3.1994 (Annexure-1), to the petitioner, informing him that his name has been recommended for appointment, provided he is found fit on other grounds. As per the direction of the respondents, he was subjected to the medical test. The petitioner was informed by communication dated 13.9.1994 (Annexure-2/1), that he has not been found medically fit as he had deficiency in A/2-vision test. This was followed by a second medical test, but he was again found unfit in the test, and the finding of the earlier occasion was affirmed vide letter dated 2.4.1996 (Annexure-4). The petitioner, therefore, preferred O.A. No. 273 of 2002 (Anil Kumar Shrivastava v. The Union of India and Ors.), which was disposed of by the Tribunal by order dated 22.3.2002 (Annexure-12), whereby the Chairman of the Railway Board was directed to dispose of the petitioner's representation with a reasoned order. The same was rejected by the Chairman of the Railway Board by his order dated 4.12.2002 (Annexure-13), leading to the present O.A. No. 533 of 2003, which has been rejected by the impugned order leading to the present writ petition at the instance of the petitioner.

(3.) While assailing the validity of the impugned order, learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the learned Tribunal has rejected O.A. No. 533 of 2003, on vague generalisations. The Tribunal has not cared to examine the contentions raised on behalf of the parties. He next submits that the Railway Board has issued circulars dated 23.11.1979, and of 7.11.1985 (Annexure-7), wherein provision has been made for alternative appointment of members of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in cases of medical deficiency.