Central Administrative Tribunal - Patna
Manoj Kumar vs Railway on 29 May, 2025
1 OA No. 1120/2019 with OA 1191/2019
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
PATNA BENCH, PATNA
O.A. No. 050/01120/2019
With
OA No.050/01191/2019
Reserved on: 09.05.2025.
Pronounced on:29.05.2025.
CORAM
HON'BLE MR. KUMAR RAJESH CHANDRA, MEMBER [A]
HON'BLE MR. RAJVEER SINGH VERMA, MEMBER [J]
O.A. No. 050/01120/2019.
1. Manoj Kumar Son of Late Ram Hari Gope, Porter, East Central
Railway, Din Dayal Upadhyay, District- Chandauli.
2. Rajmani Kumar Pandey Son of Bindeshwari Pandey, Porter, East
Central Railway, Din Dayal Upadhyay, District Chandauli.
3. Chandradeep Yadav Son of Raj Kumar Yadav Porter, East Central
Railway, Din Dayal Upadhyay, District- Chandauli.
4. Rajesh Kumar-II, Son of Ram Chandra Prasad, Porter, East Central
Railway, Haider Nagar.
5. Md Sajid Ansarai Son of Late Md Iihaur Ansari, Leverman, Porter,
East Central Railway, Din Dayal Upadhyay, District-Chandauli.
6. Nilesh Kumar Son of Kamlesh Prasad Singh, Porter, East Central
Railway, Din Dayal Upadhyay, District- Chandauli.
7. Satish Kumar Singh, Son of Badri Narayan Singh, Porter, East
Central Railway, Din Dayal Upadhyay, District-Chandauli.
8. Satya Prakash Yadav, Son of Nirmal Yadav, Porter, East Central
Railway, Din Dayal Upadhyay, District- Chandauli.
9. Vishwa Mohan Kumar, Son of Lalit Vijay Singh, Leverman, Porter,
East Central Railway, Din Dayal Upadhyay, District Chandauli.
10. Ranvir Kumar, Son of Nasib Singh, Porter, East Central Railway,
Din Dayal Upadhyay, District Chandauli.
11. Pawan Kumar, Saha Son of Tapan Saha, Shuntman, Porter, East
Central Railway, Din Dayal Upadhyay, District-Chandauli.
.......... Applicants.
By Advocate: - Shri M.P. Dixit.
-Versus-
1. The Union of India Through the General Manager, East Central
Railway, Hajipur, P.O. Digghi Kalan P.S. Hajipur (Sadar), District
Vaishali, PIN Code-844101 (Bihar).
2. The General Manager (Personnel), East Central Railway, Hajipur,
P.O. Digghi Kalan, P.S. Hajipur (Sadar), District-Vaishali, PIN Code
844101 (Bihar).
3. The Principal Chief Operating Manager, East Central Railway,
Hajipur, P.O. Digghi Kalan, P.S. Hajipur (Sadar), District Vaishali,
Pin Code 844101 (Bihar).
4. The Divisional Railway Manager, East Central Railway, Din Dayal
Upadhyay, District - Chandauli-232101 (U.P).
2 OA No. 1120/2019 with OA 1191/2019
5. The Senior Divisional Operating Manager, East Central Railway,
Din Dayal Upadhyay, District - Chandauli-232101 (U.P).
6. The Senior Divisional Personnel Officer, East Central Railway, Din
Dayal Upadhyay, District- Chandauli- 232101 (U.P.).
7. The Senior Divisional Financial Manager, East Central Railway, Din
Dayal Upadhyay, District- Chandauli- 232101 (U.P.).
........ Respondents.
By Advocate: - Shri Kumar Sachin.
O.A. No. 050/01191/2019.
1. Manoj Kumar Gupta, Son of Chandradeo Prasad Gupta, Porter, East
Central Railway, Din Dayal Upadhyay, District-Chandauli.
2. Ravi Ranjan Kumar, Son of Hargovind Prasad, Porter, East Central
Railway, Din Dayal Upadhyay, District-Chandauli.
3. Om Prakash Pal, Son of Rajendra Pal, Porter, MTGE/MGS, East
Central Railway, Din Dayal Upadhyay, District-Chandauli.
4. Rajeev Ranjan Kumar, Son of Late Devendra Garai, Porter, East
Central Railway, Din Dayal Upadhyay, District-Chandauli.
5. Anuj Kumar, Son of Jai Ram Prasad, Porter, East Central Railway,
Din Dayal Upadhyay, District- Chandauli.
6. Ritesh Kumar Yadav Son of Kailash Yadav, Porter/GAQ/MGS, East
Central Railway, Din Dayal Upadhyay, District-Chandauli.
7. Μanikant Kumar, Son of Ramanand Singh, Porter, East Central
Railway, Din Dayal Upadhyay, District- Chandauli.
8. Ajeet Kumar Pal, Son of Kashi Nath Pal, Porter, East Central
Railway, Din Dayal Upadhyay, District- Chandauli.
.......... Applicants.
By Advocate: - Shri M.P. Dixit.
-Versus-
1. The Union of India Through the General Manager, East Central
Railway, Hajipur, P.O. Digghi Kalan P.S. Hajipur (Sadar), District
Vaishali, PIN Code-844101 (Bihar).
2. The General Manager (Personnel), East Central Railway, Hajipur,
P.O. Digghi Kalan, P.S. Hajipur (Sadar), District-Vaishali, PIN Code
844101 (Bihar).
3. The Principal Chief Operating Manager, East Central Railway,
Hajipur, P.O. Digghi Kalan, P.S. Hajipur (Sadar), District Vaishali,
Pin Code 844101 (Bihar).
4. The Divisional Railway Manager, East Central Railway, Din Dayal
Upadhyay, District - Chandauli-232101 (U.P).
5. The Senior Divisional Operating Manager, East Central Railway,
Din Dayal Upadhyay, District - Chandauli-232101 (U.P).
6. The Senior Divisional Personnel Officer, East Central Railway, Din
Dayal Upadhyay, District- Chandauli- 232101 (U.P.).
7. The Senior Divisional Financial Manager, East Central Railway, Din
Dayal Upadhyay, District- Chandauli- 232101 (U.P.).
........ Respondents.
By Advocate: - Shri Bhuneshwar Pandey.
3 OA No. 1120/2019 with OA 1191/2019
ORDER
Per:- Rajveer Singh Verma, M[J]
1. Both O.As. were heard together. Issues in both the OAs are common and similar and the counsel for applicant is also the same. The facts of the OA No. 1120 of 2019 have been taken as lead case.
2. The above OAs have been filed for the following relief: -
"8.1 That your Lordships may graciously be pleased to direct/command the Respondents to include the name of applicants also henceforth in the final panel to the post of Goods Guard dated 28.11.2019 in 7th CPC Pay Matrix Level- 5, Rs 29200-92300 (earlier 6th CPC PB-1 5200-202000 + GP 2800 as contained in Annexure A/3 towards unfilled posts under 15% LDCE Quota against total 305 notified posts (199 UR, 67 SC, 39 ST) for the reason that applicants have also been declared successful in the written examination held on 02.09.2019 and secured qualifying marks as evident from the result dated 24.09.2019 as contained in Annexure A/2. 8.2 That your Lordships may further be pleased to direct the Respondents to issue promotion order to the post of Goods Guard in the same manner, other persons promoted whose name finds place in Annexure A/3 with all consequential benefits.
8.3 Any other relief or reliefs including cost of the proceeding be allowed in favour of the Applicants."
3. The facts of the case as narrated by counsel for applicants in this OA are as follows: -
i. That the Applicants are working against their respective posts of Porter/Shuntman/leverman under East Central Railway, Mugalsarai Division now renamed as Din Dayal Upadhyay. ii. That the Respondents have issued one Notification dated
04.05.2018 for filling up 305 posts (199 UR, 67 SC, 39 ST) of Goods Guard under 15% LDCE quota. (Annexure-A/1). That written examination was held on 02.09.2019 in which applicants and others have appeared and result of written test was published 4 OA No. 1120/2019 with OA 1191/2019 on 24.09.2019 (Annexure-A/2) in which applicants have been declared successful as they have secured qualifying marks where under total 292 persons including applicants have been declared successful.
iii. That in this regard it is submitted that the mandatory condition for the empanelment is that a person has to secure 60% marks in the written test and then the final panel has to be drawn on the basis of marks of record of service etc. as per the available vacancies and if a person get less than 60% marks in the written examination has no right of getting promotion as such persons are being treated as failed whereas admittedly applicants have got more than 60% marks in the written examination.
iv. The case of the applicants is that recently the respondents have issued final result of 222 persons against 292 successful persons of Annexure A/2 dated 24.09.2019 but the name of applicants did not find place without any reason when 70 posts remain unfilled out of 292 successful candidates. There is no reason for exclusion of their names in the final panel dated 28.11.2019 (Annexure- A/3) as vacancies are more than successful persons. v. It is further stated by the counsel for applicants that from perusal of the final panel dated 28.11.2019, it appears that out of 61 successful candidates under SC category, 41 candidates have been included in UR category although 67 posts have been reserved for them, therefore, due to their inclusion against UR category posts, 41 UR candidates became looser although if the SC/ST candidates are being accommodated against their own 5 OA No. 1120/2019 with OA 1191/2019 quota posts, there will be no harm to them as the seniority will be determined on the basis of marks obtained in the mandatory training. Respondents have also included other 19 candidates in the final panel dated 28.11.2019 who have already qualified for the post of Assistant Station Master on 20.11.2019 and also sent for training from 25.11.2019, hence 19 candidates are to be included in the final panel whose names are not included in the final panel.
vi. That counsel for applicants has preferred the case of employees of Danapur Division in similar matter who have filed case before this Tribunal which was allowed on 02.06. 2017.The OA is allowed. The matter subsequently allowed by Hon'ble High Court and Hon'ble Supreme Court also vide order dated 14.11.2017 and 13.07.2018 respectively. Hence, the OA.
4. Respondents have filed written statement wherein it is stated that: -
i. That a notification dated 04.05.2018 was issued under 15% LDCE quota to fill-up vacancy of 305 posts (199 UR, 67 SC & 39 ST) of Goods Guards in the division. Written examination was held on 02.09.2019 and result of written test was published on 24.09.2019 (Annexure A/2 of OA) in which all those including applicants who secured required 60% minimum qualifying marks in written examination were declared successful. Thus total number of successful candidates came to 292, wherein at the bottom in "note", it was mentioned that the above qualifying list is neither as per merit nor as per seniority. Candidates were adjudged on the basis of marks obtained in written examination 6 OA No. 1120/2019 with OA 1191/2019 and record of service and their names were arranged in order of merit amongst the qualified staff in terms of RBE No. 113/2009.
ii. That final panel was published vide Order dated 29.11.2019 keeping in view notified vacancies i.e. 305 (UR-199 SC-67 ST-
39). As against the 199 UR vacancies, 199 candidates in order of merit were empaneled, and thereafter as against the vacancies of SC-67 & ST-39 only 23 SC candidates and 01 ST candidate respectively were empanelled and remaining vacancies remain vacant due to non-availability of SC/ ST candidate in the qualified list.
iii. It is further stated that applicants did not figure in first 199 candidates of final panel based on merit under UR vacancies. So, inclusion of names of the applicants in the said panel does not arise as per extant rule.
iv. It is also submitted by the respondents that candidates who have already qualified for the post of Assistant Station Master, were also eligible for this selection and appeared in the selection procedure. They have also not submitted any refusal for exclusion of their names from this selection. Hence the question of exclusion of their name from this panel does not arise. L/c for respondents requests to dismiss the OA.
5. Rejoinder has been filed by the applicant wherein more or less similar pleadings have been made as mentioned in the OA. Apart from that, it is also submitted that applicants No.4, 7, 9 and 10, have received information under RTI, Act including dated 24.09.2020, which shows that one Sri Manoj Kumar, who has been finally 7 OA No. 1120/2019 with OA 1191/2019 empanelled at serial No.198 as contained in Annexure A/3 in the list of 222 who has obtained lesser marks than the applicant No.4, 7, 9 and equal marks with applicant No.10 but even though applicants have not been included in the said panel dated 28.11.2019 as contained in Annexure A/3.
6. Heard the learned counsels for the parties and perused the records and also considered submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties.
7. In Jitendra Kumar Singh and Another Vs State of Uttar Pradesh & others (2010) 3 SCC 119, the Hon'ble Apex Court held that "if any person belonging to reserved categories is selected of the basis or merits in open competition along with general category candidates, then he will not be adjusted towards reserved category, that is, he shall deem to have been adjusted against the unreserved vacancies. It shall be immaterial that he has availed any facility or relaxation (like relaxation in age limit) available to reserved category."
8. In these two OAs, the respondents have pointed out that candidates belonging to SC category have been selected on their own merit along with candidates belonging to general/other categories will not be adjusted against the quota reserve for SC category.
9. Ld. Counsel of the applicant has relied upon the order dated 02.06.2017 passed by this Tribunal in OA No. 582/2013. This order of the Tribunal was upheld by the Hon'ble High Court, Patna on 14.11.2017 and also upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide its decision dated 13.07.2018. the operative portion of the order dated 8 OA No. 1120/2019 with OA 1191/2019 02.06.2017 passed by this Tribunal in said OA No. 582 of 2013 is follows:-
"The OA is allowed. The respondents are directed to given promotion to all 73 candidates who had passed in the written examination forthwith including the applicants as advertisement Was for 79 posts and only 73 persons have been qualified."
10. Brief facts of the OA No. 582/2013 titled as Md. Yaqub Ansari and Anothers Vs Union of India & ors are that a notification dated 20.07.2011 for filling up of78 posts [64-UR, 9-SC and 6-ST] of Technical Grade III was issued and only 73 staff secured qualifying marks in the examination. As per Rule 64 candidates were empaneled against UR posts irrespective of their community [SC/ST/UR]. The eleven posts which remained unfilled belong to SC/ST whereas the applicants of OA No. 582/2013 belong to UR category. Only 54 persons of UR category had qualified in written test. The Tribunal after relying upon the judgment of constitutional Bench in the case of M. Nagraj Vs Union of India (2006) 8 SCC 212 wherein it is held that benefit of reservation is not available in matter of promotion and directed the respondents to give promotion to all the 73 persons who had qualified in the written examination as total promotion posts were 79.
Feeling aggrieved with the CAT, Patna Bench order dated 2nd June 2017 passed in OA No. 582/2013, the respondents have filed CWJC No. 15010 of 2017 before the hon'ble High Court, Patna and the Hon'ble High Court not only dismissed the writ petition but also upheld the order of this Tribunal and further observed that the 9 OA No. 1120/2019 with OA 1191/2019 decision of the Railway authorities to provide the benefit to reserved category candidates to unreserved category weas a mistake committed by them, may be on the basis of Railway Board's circular issued earlier, but after the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in M. Nagraj case, such guideline and circular would have its legal force.
In view of the authoritative prono9uncement of the Hon'ble High Court of Patna giving promotions to SC category persons against unreserved quota being ipso facts illegal.
Further, the respondents have filed Special Leave petition (Civil) Diary No. (S) 19270/2018 against the final judgment and order dated 14.11.2007 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Patna in C.W.J.C. No.15010/2017 before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the Hon'ble Supreme Court after relying upon the applicability of the ratio of M. Nagraj and ors. Vs. Union of India & ors (2006) 8 SCC 212 have declined to interfere in the instant case and have dismissed the Special Leave Petition.
From the above, it is stated that order dated 2nd June 2017 passed by the CAT, Patna Bench in OA No. 582/2013 in Md. Yaqub's case(supra) has acquired its finality.
The facts and circumstances involved in the present case are also similar to the facts and circumstances involved in the OA No. 582/2013 of Md. Yaqub's case (supra) and we are bound to follow the ratio laid down by this Tribunal in Md. Yaqub's case for the reason that Hon'ble Supreme Court decision dated 13.07.2018 passed in Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No. (S) 19270/2018 is a later pronouncement to the case of Jitendra Kumar Singh's case 10 OA No. 1120/2019 with OA 1191/2019 (2010) 3SCC 119 as relied upon by the respondents and thus the judgment dated 13.07.2018 of Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP (Civil) Diary No. (S) 19270/2018 in Md. Yaqub's case became binding principle.
11. The respondents have published result of 292 persons against 305 posts and finally 222 persons have been empanelled against 292 persons who have been declared pass on 24.09.2019, thus 70 posts remain unfilled in spite of having successful other candidates.
12. The respondents have included 19 candidates in the final panel dated 28.11.2019 who have already qualified for the post of Assistant Station Master on 20.11.2019 and also sent them for training from 25.11.2019, i.e. prior to publish the final panel on 28.11.2019. In these circumstances 19 candidates who have qualified and their names are mentioned in panel of 292 candidates should have been given an opportunity for the post became vacant due to selection of 19 candidates for Assistant Station Master.
13. From the analogy discussed above, both the OAs, i.e. OA No. 1120/2019 titled as Manoj Kumar and others Vs Union of India and others and OA No. 1191/2019 titles as Manoj Kumar Gupta and others Vs the Union of India and others deserve to be allowed. As a result thereof, we allowed both the OAs with following directions: -
(1) Respondents are directed to place the name of the eligible candidates of unreserved category including the applicants in the final panel as successful candidates who have obtained qualifying marks and found place in the list of qualified persons in LDCE selection process held for the post of Goods 11 OA No. 1120/2019 with OA 1191/2019 Guard under 15% of LDCE quota against the vacant posts arising out of: -
(a) Due to selection of 19 candidates from the panel after their selection to the post of Assistant Station Manager from the list of select/qualified candidates.
(b) Against the post of Unreserved Category for which respondents have mistakenly selected/promoted the candidates of Scheduled Caste category without disturbing the seniority and selection of Scheduled Cast category candidates.
(c) Any other post became vacant during this period.
(d) To accord notional benefit of promotion i.e. seniority benefit to the successful candidate of UR category from the date of seniority given to other successful candidates. (2) This order shall be implemented within three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. No order as to costs.
[Rajveer Singh Verma] [Kumar Rajesh Chandra]
Member [J] Member [A]
BP/-