Central Administrative Tribunal - Jabalpur
Shiv Kapoor Patel vs M/O Railways on 3 April, 2025
Reserved
(On 28.01.2025)
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
JABALPUR BENCH
JABALPUR
Dated : This the _03rd day of __April__ 2025
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Akhil Kumar Srivastava, Member (J)
Hon'ble Ms Mallika Arya, Member (A)
Original Application No. 925 of 2019
Shiv Kapoor Patel, S/o Shri Dinesh Kumar Singh, a/a 29 years,
R/o Village Bhawa, Post Devpura, District Mirzapur - 231001.
.......Applicant
By Adv: Shri Prahlad Choudharu
VERSUS
1. Union of India Through Chairman, Railway Recruitment
Board, Bhopal, East Railway Colony, Bhopal (MP) -
462053.
2. Railway Recruitment Control Board, Ministry of Railways,
Railway Board, Rail Bhawan, Raaisena Road, New Delhi -
110001.
3. Railway Recruitment Control Board Bhopal under the
control of Ministry of Railways, Bhopal, East Railway
PIYUSH Colony, Bhopal (MP) - 462053.
CHANDRA
PIYUSH ........Respondents
CHANDRA
2025.04.04
10:04:32+05'30'
By Adv: Shri S.K. Patel
1
ORDER
By Ms. Mallika Arya, AM Instant OA has been filed by the applicant challenging the impugned order dated 10.02.2016 passed by respondent No. 3 as the respondents have rejected his case under clause No. 6.07 of the advertisement No. 1/2014 dated 18.01.2014.
2. The brief facts of the case are that the applicant applied for the post of Loco Pilot under the advertisement notice no. 1/2014 dated 18.01.2014. The date of written examination was fixed on 15.06.2014. The applicant applied for the said post and his admit card was issued under the category of OBC with roll number 15141014007624 and was called for written examination on 15.06.2014. The applicant appeared in the examination and was declared successful and he was called for verification of candidature with the original documents on 27.11.2015. PIYUSH 3. The applicant has been a meritorious student who CHANDRA PIYUSH completed his High School in 2004 and thereafter in 2006 he CHANDRA 2025.04.04 10:04:32+05'30' completed Intermediate and took Diploma in Electrical engineering in 2012. At the same time for the purpose of caste certificate the applicant obtained the caste certificate from State 2 of U.P. on 03.11.2015 and thereafter on 19.07.2016. The action of Respondent No. 3 is bad in the eyes of law because clause no. 6.07 cannot be attracted in the case of applicant as he had obtained a diploma in Electrical Engineering in 2012. Thereafter, the applicant filed O.A. No. 330/1457 of 2016 before Allahabad Bench of this Tribunal and the same was dismissed as withdrawn on the ground of jurisdiction of the Tribunal. Hence this original application.
4. The applicant has filed written arguments in which he has reiterated the same facts as in the OA. Thereafter, the final result was declared in which the applicant was declared unsuccessful on the ground that his initial application did not fulfill the parameters of Clause 6.07 of the advertisement dated 18.01.2014 which reads as follows:-
Clause 6.07 :-
6: Invalid Applications PIYUSH 6.07: Does not possess the prescribed qualification for the post CHANDRA on the date of application. PIYUSH CHANDRA 2025.04.04 10:04:32+05'30'
5. The respondents have filed their short reply in which they have submitted that the applicant had applied in response to 3 Centralized Employment Notice No. 01/2014 for the vacancy of Assistant Loco Pilot (ALP) and Technician Categories. As per the application since his qualification was Diploma in Electrical Engineering, he was found eligible for the post of Assistant Loco Pilot (ALP) at the initial stage. The Centralized Employment Notice No. 01/2014, required qualification of Assistant Loco Pilot (ALP) as Matriculation plus course completed Act Apprenticeship / ITI approved by NCVT/SCVT in the trades of Fitter / Electrician / Instrument Mechanic / Millwright Maintenance Mechanic / Mechanic Radio & TV / Electronics Mechanic / Mechanic Motor Vehicle / Wireman / Tractor Mechanic / Refrigeration & AC Mechanic or Diploma in Mechanical / Electrical / Electronics / Automobile Engineering recognized by AICTE in lieu of ITI. The applicant was called for a written examination on 15.06.2014 and he cleared written examination, after which he was called for an Aptitude test conducted for Assistant Loco Pilot (ALP). The applicant was called for document verification which was held PIYUSH between 05.10.2015 to 17.12.2015. CHANDRA PIYUSH CHANDRA 6. During document verification the applicant produced the 2025.04.04 10:04:32+05'30' semester / year wise mark sheets and a provisional / final diploma certificate of Electrical Engineering Branch issued by IASE 4 Deemed University (Institute of Advanced Studies in Education Deemed University), Gandhi Vidya Mandir, Sardarshahr-331401, Rajasthan, India. He produced a letter from Controller of Examination bearing no. IASEDU/SRDR/ EXAM/2684/15 dated 02.312.2015 in which it has been certified that Shiv Kapoor Patel S/o Mr. Dinesh Kumar Singh, Enrolment Number 1ASE/2/09/J/05585 was a student of this University in Distance Education Mode. As per Railway Board‟s letter no. E(NG)11/2010/RR-1/17 dated 30.05.2013 the issue of recognition of Engineering Degree / diploma offered through distance mode has been examined in consultation with Distance Education Council , IGNOU, New Delhi, wherein it has come to the notice that no courses in Engineering are offered through distance mode. A letter was given to the applicant on date 27.11.2015 to submit an approval letter of AICTE in respect of IASE (Deemed University). Hence as per Railway Boards letter bearing no. E(NG)II/2010/RR-1/17 dated 30.05.2013, the candidature of the PIYUSH applicant was cancelled under Para 6.07 of Centralized CHANDRA PIYUSH Employment Notice No. 01/2014 and the same was informed to CHANDRA the applicant vide this office letter no. रे नबो/भोपाल/उम्मीदवारी 2025.04.04 10:04:32+05'30' ननरस्त/पे नल/139 नदनाां क 10.02.2016.
5
7. The applicant has filed rejoinder to the short reply of the respondents wherein which he submitted that during document verification the applicant had produced semester/year wise mark sheets and a provisional/final diploma Certificate of Electrical Engineering Branch issued by IASE Deemed University.
8. He also submitted a letter of AICTE dated 04.11.2004 & 22.10.2007 wherein it has been specifically mentioned that it is not mandatory for the Universities and Deemed Universities to take prior approval from AICTE to start any technical education programme (regular distance education). Apart from the above letter of AICTE the Govt. of India vide notification dated 05.04.2006 has issued the following clarification‟ "It is not a pre-requisite for an institution notified as a "Deemed to be University" to obtain the approval of the AICTE to start any programme in technical or management education leading to an award, including degree in disciplines covered under the AICTE Act 1987."
9. As far as the clarification regarding declaration of date of result of applicant's diploma is concerned (Annexure R-5) it was PIYUSH CHANDRA declared on 01.09.2012 which is prior to cut off date mentioned in PIYUSH CHANDRA 2025.04.04 10:04:32+05'30' the advertisement dated 18.01.2014.
6
10. We have heard learned counsels for both the parties and perused the records carefully.
11. An advertisement No. No. 01/2024 dated 18.01.2014 (Annexure A/2) was issued by the Ministry of Railway (respondents) for the post of Assistant Loco Pilot and Technician Categories in which it was stated that the qualification required for the said post of Assistant Loco Pilot (ALP) was Matriculation plus course completed Act Apprenticeship / ITI approved by NCVT/SCVT in the trades of Fitter / Electrician / Instrument Mechanic / Millwright Maintenance Mechanic / Mechanic Radio & TV / Electronics Mechanic / Mechanic Motor Vehicle / Wireman / Tractor Mechanic / Refrigeration & AC Mechanic or Diploma in Mechanical / Electrical / Electronics / Automobile Engineering recognized by AICTE in lieu of ITI.
12. At the time of document verification the applicant produced a provisional diploma certificate issued from Institute of Advance PIYUSH Studied in Education Deemed University, Gandhi Vidya Mandir, CHANDRA PIYUSH Sardarshahr, Rajasthan - 331401. A letter was given to the CHANDRA 2025.04.04 10:04:32+05'30' applicant to submit a proof regarding his course to have been approved by AICTE. The applicant produced a letter from IASE (Deemed University) that he was a student of the University and 7 he had appeared in the final examination of Diploma in Electrical Engineering through Distance Education Mode.
13. The issued regarding recognition of Engineering Degrees / Diplomas through Distance Learning Mode was communicated by the Railway Board vide letter dated 30.05.2013 to the Programme Coordinator (DME), School of Engineering & Technology (SOET), Indira Gandhi National Open University (IGNOU), Maidan Garhi, New Delhi (Annexure R/6). It has been stated in the said letter as follows:-
"the issue of recognition of Engineering Degrees / Diplomas offered through distance mode has been examined in consultation with Distance Education Council and we have been informed that no courses in Engineering offered through distance mode have been granted recognition by the committee of UGC-AICTE-DEC as of now."
14. Since the courses through distance learning mode for engineering disciplines have not been recognized by the AICTE, the candidature of the applicant was cancelled as per para 6.07 of the notification.
PIYUSH 15. We also take note of the letter of cancellation issued by the CHANDRA PIYUSH respondents‟ on 10.02.2016. However the applicant approached CHANDRA 2025.04.04 10:04:32+05'30' this Tribunal on 30.08.2019 i.e. after a lapse of more than 3½ years. From the record it appears that the MA No. 200/1281/2019 was filed by the applicant for condonation of delay 8 which has not been allowed. The grounds taken by the applicant requesting for condonation of delay are that he had wrongly filed the OA before CAT Allahabad Bench and thereafter before Hon‟ble Allahabad High Court and by way of a further Review Petition before the CAT Allahabad Bench who decided the matter on 29.04.2019. Therefore the due date for filing of the OA under the correct jurisdiction got delayed beyond one year. Respondents on the other hand, in response to the said MA have stated that CAT Allahabad Bench vide order dated 30.11.2016 in OA No. 300/1457/2016 had allowed the applicant to withdraw the OA for want of jurisdiction. Despite this the applicant did not file the OA before CAT Jabalpur and waited for three years before filing the present OA.
16. The respondents have also drawn our attention to the Hon‟ble Supreme Court judgment in the case of State of Uttranchal and another vs. Shiv Charan Singh Bhandari and others - (2013) 12 SCC 179 in which the Hon‟ble Apex Court has PIYUSH declined to exercise extraordinary jurisdiction in the case of the CHANDRA PIYUSH CHANDRA petitioner invokes jurisdiction of the Court with inordinate delay, 2025.04.04 10:04:32+05'30' and held as under:-
9
" In State of T.N. v. Seshachalam, this Court, testing the equality clause on the bedrock of delay and laches pertaining to grant of service benefit, has ruled thus: -
"....filing of representations alone would not save the period of limitation. Delay or laches is a relevant factor for a court of law to determine the question as to whether the claim made by an applicant deserves consideration. Delay and/or laches on the part of a government servant may deprive him of the benefit which had been given to others. Article 14 of the Constitution of India would not, in a situation of that nature, be attracted as it is well known that law leans in favour of those who are alert and vigilant."
17. In another case of P.S. Sadasivaswamy vs. State of Tamil Nadu - (1975) 1 SCC 152 the Hon‟ble Apex Court has held as under:-
"It is not that there is any period of limitation for the Courts to exercise their powers under Article 226 nor is it that there can never be a case where the Courts cannot interfere in a matter after the passage of a certain length of time. But it would be a sound and wise exercise of discretion for the Courts to refuse to exercise their extra-ordinary powers under Article 226 in the case of persons who do not approach it expeditiously for relief and who stand by and allow things to happen and then approach the Court to put forward stale claims and try to unsettle settled matters- The petitioner's petition should, therefore have been dismissed in limine. Entertaining such petitions is a waste of time of the court. It clogs the work of the Court and impedes the work of the court in considering legitimate grievances as also its normal work. We consider that the High court was right in dismissing the appellant's petition as well as the appeal."
18. Hence, we observe that the no case is made out by the applicant for condonation of delay. It is observed that the delay in PIYUSH CHANDRA filing the OA is not on account of ignorance regarding the PIYUSH CHANDRA 2025.04.04 provisions of Rule 21 of AT Act, 1985, since he was aware of the 10:04:32+05'30' jurisdiction of the Bench under which this OA would lie. 10
19. In the rejoinder the applicant has produced a copy of the order dated 04.11.2004 issued by AICTE wherein it has been mentioned that it is not a prerequisite for an institution notified as "Deemed to be University" to obtain the approval of the AICTE to be given the status of the Deemed University. The question here is not as to whether the said institute was having the status of „Deemed University‟ or not. The grounds for rejection of applicant‟s case are different and the case has been rejected by respondents in consultation with Distance Education Council, IGNOU, Maidan Garhi, New Delhi - wherein it has been stated that "no courses in Engineering offered through distance mode have been granted recognization by the Committee of UGC-AICTE-DEC as of now". Therefore, Engineering Diploma awarded by AIES through the distance learning mode was not recognized by the AICTE at the relevant time.
20. Keeping in view the above discussions and findings we hold that since the diploma in Electrical Engineering awarded by PIYUSH the Institute of Advanced Studies in Education (Deemed CHANDRA PIYUSH CHANDRA University), Gandhi Vidya Mandir, Sardarshahr, Rajasthan - 2025.04.04 10:04:32+05'30' 331401 to the applicant through the distance learning mode was not recognized by the AICTE at the relevant time which was 11 premature for the post of Assistant Loco Pilot by the respondents. Hence, the respondents have rightly rejected the candidature of the applicant.
21. We do not find any reason to interfere with the said decision.
22. In light of the above the OA is dismissed on account of being time barred and also on merits. No costs.
(Mallika Arya) (Akhil Kumar Srivastava) Administrative Member Judicial Member /Piyush/ PIYUSH CHANDRA PIYUSH CHANDRA 2025.04.04 10:04:32+05'30' 12