Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Raj Kumar vs M/O Railways on 20 March, 2024
1
Item No. 59/ C-2 O.A. No. 3688/2016
Central Administrative Tribunal
Principal Bench: New Delhi
O.A. No. 3688/2016
This the 20th day of March, 2024
Hon'ble Mr. Tarun Shridhar, Member (A)
Hon'ble Mrs. Pratima K Gupta, Member (J)
1. Raj Kumar, (age about 40 years), Group-'C'
S/o Shri Netrapal Singh, Desig-Commercial Apprentice
D-85, Sector-9, New Vijay Nagar, Ghaziabad, U.P.
2. Sanjay Kumar Singh, (age about 42 years), Group-C'
S/o- Late Shri Rajni Kumar Singh Desig-Commercial Apprentice
A-83, 3rd Floor, Nehru Gali, Mandawali, Delhi-110092.
3. Mor Mukut Pal, (age about 33 years), Group-'C'
S/o Shri Ram Swaroop, Desig-Commercial Apprentice
D-40, Sector-9, New Vijay Nagar, Gaziabad, U.P.
4. Prasann Deep Bhardwaj, (age about 30 years), Group-'C'
Desig-Commercial Apprentice
S/o Shri Pradeep Kumar Bhardwaj, House No. 76/B-3, Ashok
Vihar Railway Colony, Ashok Vihar, Phase-III, Delhi-110052.
5. Roop Narayan Prasad, (age about 40 years), Group-C
Desig-Commercial Apprentice
S/o Shri Lalendra, D-82, Sector-9, New Vijay Nagar,
Ghaziabad, U.P.
6. Tarun Kumar, (age about 32 years), Group-'C'
S/o Shri Rakesh Kumar Desig-Commercial Apprentice
172, Old Pancvhwati, Near Shankar Lal Hospital, Gaziabad.
7. Rajesh Kumar, (age about 40 years), Group-'C'
S/o Late Shri Sahdeo Prasad, H. No. 419, Gali No.6, Upper
Ground Floor, Sant Nagar, Burari, Delhi.
Desig-Commercial Apprentice
8. Ankur Kamal, (age about 30 years), Group-'C'
S/o K. D. Kamal, Desig-Commercial Apprentice Apprentice
M-112, G. S. Apartment, Sector-13, Rohini, Delhi-11085,
9. Gaurav Sharma, (age about 30- years), Group-'C'
S/o Late Shri S. L. Sharma,
2
Item No. 59/ C-2 O.A. No. 3688/2016
Desig-Commercial Apprentice
House No. 1/1208, East Ram Nagar, Shahadara, Delhi-110032.
10. Vijay Varun, (age about 32 years), Group-'C'
S/o Late Shri S. K. Varun, Desig-Commercial Apprentice
House No. C-3/8, Railway Quarters, Basant Lane, New Delhi-
110001.
11. Amit Kumar Mishra, (age about 35 years), Group-'C'
S/o S. S. Mishra, Desig-Commercial Apprentice
Flat No.S-2, Plot No.208, Vaishali, Sector-6, Gaziabad, U.P.
12. Anand Mishra, (age about 35 years), Group-'C'
S/o Desig-Commercial Apprentice Outstanding Branch, DRM
Office, New Delhi..
13. Satyarth, (age about 30 years), Group-'C'
S/o Late Shri S. L. Malra Desig-Commercial Apprentice 470 B,
Gaupuri, Gaziababad, U.P.
...Applicant
(By Advocate: Mr S K Jha)
Versus
1. General Manager, Northern Railway,
Baroda House, New Delhi
2. The Sr. Divisional Personal officer/ Admin,
Northern Railway, Divisional Officer,
State Entry Road, New Delhi
...Respondents
(By Advocate: Mr. Pradeep Kumar Sharma)
3
Item No. 59/ C-2 O.A. No. 3688/2016
ORDER (ORAL)
Hon'ble Mr. Tarun Shridhar, Member (A) The applicants herein are Commercial Apprentices who seek promotion/appointment to the post of Commercial Inspector in terms of the recruitment rules as contained in the Indian Railway Establishment Manual (IREM).
2. They seek the following relief:
a). this Hon'ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased quash the notification dated 08.07.2016 rejection order dated 22.09.2016;
b) this Hon'ble Tribunal may direct the Respondents to fill up the 25% post of Commercial Inspector in terms of para 130 of IREM-I
c) this Hon'ble Tribunal may further make such other and further orders it deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case
3. Notice was issued on 28.10.2016 and it has been more than seven years that we have not been able to consider and adjudicate this simple matter. With the passage of time several other 4 Item No. 59/ C-2 O.A. No. 3688/2016 developments may have taken place and probably successive instances of recruitment/promotion may also have taken place.
4. At this stage we feel that while we do recognise that the applicants maybe nursing a genuine grievance, we are not able to show much indulgence. Further, we do record that while there are documents on record to show that the respondents have taken steps to fill vacancies of 75% quota, there is no document to show the steps taken by them for filing up post in the 25% quota which belong to the category of the present applicants. We do take note of the submissions made in the counter reply wherein the respondents have given some clarification, we find that the counter reply is also of 2017 and much water would have flown down since then.
5. Against the background of what has been stated above it would be appropriate if the applicants were to prefer a comprehensive representation to the competent authority among the respondents expressing their claim with respect to promotion to the post of Commercial Inspector and the competent authority were to take a well considered decision representation in accordance with the rules governing the subject. Depending upon the outcome of such decision, the applicants shall be at liberty to take recourse to an appropriate remedy in accordance to law and let the law of limitation not stand as an impediment considering the fact that 5 Item No. 59/ C-2 O.A. No. 3688/2016 there has been a considerable delay on our part too in deciding this OA.
7. Let the applicants if they so wish file their representation within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of this Order. The said representation shall be decided upon within a period of four weeks in accordance with rules and instructions governing the subject.
8. The OA is disposed of accordingly.
9. No order as to costs.
( Pratima K Gupta) ( Tarun Shridhar) Member (J) Member (A) /ks/