UNION OF INDIA Vs. HARENDRA GAWARIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, against the order dtd. 12/10/2021 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur (for short 'The Tribunal'), in the original application No.291/683/2013 whereby the original application filed by the respondent was allowed and the petitioner No.1-Union of India has been directed to give appointment to the respondent on the post of Group-D with all consequential benefits and the said exercise was to be carried out within three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy thereof.

(2.) Skeleton facts of the case are that the North Western Railway Recruitment Cell issued an advertisement No.02/2010 on 16/12/2010 by which the applications for recruitment on several posts of Group 'D' i.e. Track Man, Traffic Khallasi, Helper, Cleaner, Cook etc. were invited, in pursuance of the said advertisement, the respondent submitted an application under the category of Other Backward Class (OBC). After participation in the process for selection, he qualified in the written examination and appeared in physical eligibility test. Thereafter, he was called for the medical test, in which, he was qualified. Finally, respondent was found fit but, subsequently his candidature was rejected vide order dtd. 29/7/2013 issued by the Department of North Western Railway for the reason that the Postal Order submitted by him was not within limitation.

(3.) The respondent feeling aggrieved by the order of rejection of his candidature, submitted the Original Application before the Tribunal pleading therein that the Postal Order submitted by him was well within the parameters and the amount of said Postal Order was received by the Railway Department and the same was also credited in its account but inadvertently, in the application form, the wrong year of Postal Order was mentioned. The respondent pleaded in the Original Application that he personally approached the Office of Railways and requested that the amount of Postal Order was proper but by inadvertent mistake, the date of Postal Order was mentioned as incorrect, which he prayed to be corrected. The respondent further pleaded that the amount of Postal Order was received by the Railway Authorities and after that he was allowed to participate in the process of recruitment and ultimately he was declared qualified but his candidature has been wrongly rejected only on a hyper-technical ground.