Central Administrative Tribunal - Chandigarh
Ramesh Chand Meena vs M/O Railways on 31 July, 2018
Author: P. Gopinath
Bench: P. Gopinath
1
O.A.060/00415/2016
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
CHANDIGARH BENCH
Pronounced on : 31.07.2018
Reserved on : 26.07.2018
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.SANJEEV KAUSHIK, MEMBER(J)
HON'BLE MRS. P. GOPINATH, MEMBER(A)
OA No. 060/00415/2016
Ramesh Chand Meena S/o Sh. Hazari Lal Meena, aged 35 years, R/o
Village and Post Pragpura, Tehsil Reni, District Alwan (Rajasthan) -
301409.
...Applicant
BY ADVOCATE: Sh. Rohit Seth
Versus
1. Union of India through Secretary, Railway Board, Rail Bhawan,
New Delhi.
2. The Chairman, Railway Recruitment Cell, Northern Railway, Lajpat
Nagar-1, New Delhi.
3. The Chairman, Railway Recruitment Board, Jammu Srinagar
Railway Colony (West), Jammu - 180012, Jammu and Kashmir.
4. Union of India through General Manager, Northern Railways,
Baroda House, New Delhi.
5. Chairperson, Government of India, Ministry of Railways, Railway
Recruitment Boards, Northern Railways, Baroda House, New
Delhi.
...Respondents
BY ADVOCATE: Sh. Lakhinder Bir Singh
ORDER
BY MRS. P. GOPINATH, MEMBER(A):-
Applicant had applied in response to a Centralized Employment Notice (CEN) No. 1/2014 for the post of Technician Grade III/Driver-cum-Mechanic, Technician Grade III/Driver and 2 O.A.060/00415/2016 Technician Grade III/Crane Driver mentioned under Serial No. 106, 88 and 90 respectively of the advertisement. Minimum education qualification prescribed was Matriculation plus course completed Act Apprentice/ITI approved by NCVT/SCVT in the trade of Motor Mechanic/Tractor Mechanic/Vehicle Mechanic with valid driving license. The process comprised of a written test, medical examination and documents verification.
2. Applicant argues that in the result declared, only roll numbers of 36 qualified persons were mentioned without indicating the marks they obtained. Applicant moved an RTI application for his marks in the written test and the cut off marks under ST category. Applicant was informed that he obtained 30.976 marks in written test and the cut off marks for the post of Technician Grade III/DCM under ST category was 25.555 marks.
3. Applicant submitted a representation to be called for document verification as he has secured more marks than the last ST category selected person. The applicant was not invited as he was considered ineligible by the respondents. Applicant filed OA No. 1145/2015 which was dismissed on 15.12.2015 with liberty to file fresh with better particulars.
4. Against 17 posts for ST category, result of 16 had been declared. As per further information obtained by the applicant, only 14 candidates came for document verification. Of these only ten ST candidates have joined service. So, applicant argues that there are some ST posts vacant against which he can be considered. The 3 O.A.060/00415/2016 prayer of the applicant is to declare the result of the applicant and grant him appointment to the post of Technician Grade III/DCM.
5. The respondents in the reply statement submit that a Centralized Employment Notification (CEN) was issued on 18.01.2014 for all Railway Recruitment Boards by the Nodal RRB which included the post for which the applicant had applied. The applicant gave first priority to Technician Grade III Driver-cum- Mechanic, second priority to Technician Grade III Mill Wright Mechanic and third priority to Technician Grade III Driver and fourth priority to Technician III Crane Driver. The common qualification for all the four posts is ITI qualification in Motor Mechanic trade. 6.
7. The respondents argue that the applicant does not possess the minimum qualification of ITI in Motor Mechanic trade required for the post. The applicant was allowed to sit in the examination. Before the declaration of result, pre-verification of applications was done. During pre-verification, it was noticed that the applicant has done a six month course in the trade of Driver cum Mechanic (LMV) produced as Annexure A-2, whereas the required technical qualification for the post as per CEN was ITI approved by NCVT/SCVT in Motor Mechanic trade.
8. Before applying for the post, the candidate was expected to ensure that he fulfills the qualification required for the post which includes the educational and technical qualification from a recognized Board/University/NCVT/SCVT.
9. The main argument of the respondent is that the applicant does not possess the minimum educational qualification required for the 4 O.A.060/00415/2016 post whereas the applicant has done a six month course in the trade of Driver cum Mechanic (LMV). In fact, the qualification required for the post of Technician Grade III Driver cum Mechanic is ITI in Motor Mechanic trade approved by NCVT/SCVT.
10. On a perusal of Annexures A-2 & A-3, we find that the applicant had a six month qualification of Driver cum Mechanic which is not equivalent to ITI approved course sought by the respondents.
11. During arguments, the counsel for respondents clarified this by saying that whereas the applicant had done a six month course, a proper ITI course as required for the post, should be of 82-88 weeks. In support of this statement, respondents produced Annexure R-1 wherein the National Council for Vocational Training (NCVT) recommendations of norms for introducing Driver cum Mechanic trade in ITI and ITC was circulated which confirms that the said course should be of 82-88 weeks. Hence, the applicant, in view of this clarification provided, does not possess the required qualification for the post.
12. OA, thus, being devoid of merits, is dismissed. No order as to costs.
(P. GOPINATH) MEMBER (A) (SANJEEV KAUSHIK) MEMBER (J) Dated:
ND*