Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Anil Kumar vs Municipal Corporation Of Delhi on 23 March, 2026
1
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI
OA No.3751/2025
MA/ 228/2026
With
OA No.1391/2025
MA/165/2026
Reserved on: 20.02.2026
Pronounced on: 23.03.2026
Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J)
Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A)
OA No.1391/2025
1. Kirti Pal,
Serving as Assistant Engineer (Civil),
Group 'B', Aged About 55 years,
S/o Late SH. Khem Chand R/o C-508,
CR Park, New Delhi-110019
2. Satish Kumar Singhal,
Serving as Assistant Engineer (Civil),
Group 'B', Aged About 54 years,
S/o Sh. Suraj Bhan Singhal,
R/o L-46, Shastri Nagar,
Delhi ...Applicants
VERSUS
1. Municipal Corporation of Delhi,
through its Commissioner,
5th Floor, Dr. S.P. Mukherjee Civic Centre,
Jawahar Lal Nehru Marg,
New Delhi-110002.
2. The Addl. Commissioner (Establishment),
Municipal Corporation of Delhi,
5th Floor, Dr. S.P. Mukherjee Civic Centre,
Jawahar Lal Nehru Marg,
New Delhi-110002.
3. The Director (P),
Municipal Corporation of Delhi,
5th Floor, Dr. S.P. Mukherjee Civic Centre,
Jawahar Lal Nehru Marg,
New Delhi-110002.
4. Sh. Buddhi Sagar Gupta,
S/o Sh. Hari Lal Gupta,
O/o 5th Floor, Zonal Office Building,
Dhansa Stand, Najafgarh,
1
LALIT
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI
OA No.198/2017
Reserved on: 14.01.2026
Pronounced on: 04.02.2026
Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J)
Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A)
Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj,
Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway,
Central Hospital, New Delhi,
Aged about 47 years,
R/o 158/16, Railway Colony,
Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant
(By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal)
VERSUS
1. Union of India,
Through its Secretary,
Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan,
New Delhi
2. General Manager (P),
Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi
3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad)
Through its Chairman,
DRM Office Complex,
Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad
4. DRM (P)
Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP
5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad,
Working as Lab. Supdt.
Sub Divisional Railway Hospital,
Itarasi, MP
GOSAIN
6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt.,
Northern Railway Divisional Hospital,
Lucknow, UP
7. Kulbhushan Doval, Working as Lab. Supdt.,
Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP - Respondents
(Mr. Pradeep Kr. Sharma, Mr. Piyush Gaur for respondents 1 to 4, Mr.
Somnath Bhattacharya with Mr. Pradeep Tripathi for respondents 4 & 5
2
New Delhi-110043.
5. Sh. Shadab Alam,
S/o Sh. Mohd. Naieem Ali,
O/o Sector-IV, Pushp Vihar,
New Delhi-110017.
6. Sh. Robin Kumar,
S/o Sh. Mahesh Kumar Gandhi,
O/o Second Floor, 16 Raj Pur Road,
Kamala Nehra Redge,
Civil Lines, Delhi-110054.
7. Sh. Manish Jain,
S/o Sh. Daya Chandra Jain,
O/o Zonal Office Building,
Shiv Mandir Marg, Lajpat Nagar,
New Delhi-110024.
8. Sh. Lalit Sharma,
S/o Sh. Prabhu Dayal Sharma,
O/o Sahib Singh Verma Community Hall,
Block-A-I, Keshav Puram,
Delhi-110035.
9. Sh. Athar Mustafa,
S/o Sh. Akbar Ali,
O/o Second Floor, 16 Raj Pur Road,
Kamala Nehra Redge,
Civil Lines, Delhi-110054
10. Sh. Tarun Shankar Arya,
S/o Sh. Sita Ram Arya,
O/o Nigam Bhawan, D.B. Gupta Road,
Dev Nagar, Karol Bagh- 110005. ..Respondents
The private Respondent served through official respondent
OA 3751-2025
1. Anil Kumar
S/o Sh. Shri Krishan
R/o 72, Ambika Vihar, Paschim Vihar,
Delhi-110087.
(Aged about 53 years)
2. Manish Huria
S/o Late Sh. K.L. Huria
R/o B-15 Manu Apartment,
Mayur Vihar, Delhi - 110091.
(Aged about 49 years)
1
LALIT
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI
OA No.198/2017
Reserved on: 14.01.2026
Pronounced on: 04.02.2026
Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J)
Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A)
Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj,
Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway,
Central Hospital, New Delhi,
Aged about 47 years,
R/o 158/16, Railway Colony,
Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant
(By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal)
VERSUS
1. Union of India,
Through its Secretary,
Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan,
New Delhi
2. General Manager (P),
Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi
3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad)
Through its Chairman,
DRM Office Complex,
Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad
4. DRM (P)
Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP
5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad,
Working as Lab. Supdt.
Sub Divisional Railway Hospital,
Itarasi, MP
GOSAIN
6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt.,
Northern Railway Divisional Hospital,
Lucknow, UP
7. Kulbhushan Doval, Working as Lab. Supdt.,
Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP - Respondents
(Mr. Pradeep Kr. Sharma, Mr. Piyush Gaur for respondents 1 to 4, Mr.
Somnath Bhattacharya with Mr. Pradeep Tripathi for respondents 4 & 5
3
3. Ashwani Dabas
S/o Sh. Jai Prakash Dabas
R/o A-150, 2nd Floor, S
Saraswati Vihar, Pitampura,
Delhi - 110034.
(Aged about 49 years).
4. Raghvendra Singh Dabas
S/o Late Sh. Karan Singh Dabas
R/o 1665, T/17 B Thana Road,
Najafgarh, Delhi - 110087.
(Aged about 50 years)
5. S.P. Dabas
S/o Sh. Ram Dhan Dabas
R/o Villages + P.O. - Lodpur,
Delhi-110081.
(Aged about 50 years)
6. Mithlesh Kumari
D/o Sh. U.S. Sharma
R/o C-154, Golf View Apartment,
Saket, Delhi-110017.
(Aged about 50 years) ....Applicants
VERSUS
1. Municipal Corporation of Delhi,
through its Commissioner,
5th Floor, Dr. S.P. Mukherjee Civic Centre,
Jawahar Lal Nehru Marg, New Delhi-110002.
2. The Addl. Commissioner (Establishment),
Municipal Corporation of Delhi,
5th Floor, Dr. S.P. Mukherjee Civic Centre,
Jawahar Lal Nehru Marg, New Delhi-110002.
3. The Director (P),
Municipal Corporation of Delhi,
5th Floor, Dr. S.P. Mukherjee Civic Centre,
Jawahar Lal Nehru Marg, New Delhi-110002.
4. Sh. Buddhi Sagar Gupta, (2018 Batch)
S/o Sh. Hari Lal Gupta, O/o 5th Floor,
Zonal Office Building, Dhansa Stand,
Najafgarh, New Delhi-110043.
5. Sh. Shadab Alam, (2018 Batch)
S/o Sh. Mohd. Naieem Ali,
O/o Sector-IV, Pushp Vihar,
New Delhi-110017.
6. Varun (2022 Batch)
1
LALIT
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI
OA No.198/2017
Reserved on: 14.01.2026
Pronounced on: 04.02.2026
Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J)
Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A)
Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj,
Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway,
Central Hospital, New Delhi,
Aged about 47 years,
R/o 158/16, Railway Colony,
Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant
(By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal)
VERSUS
1. Union of India,
Through its Secretary,
Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan,
New Delhi
2. General Manager (P),
Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi
3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad)
Through its Chairman,
DRM Office Complex,
Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad
4. DRM (P)
Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP
5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad,
Working as Lab. Supdt.
Sub Divisional Railway Hospital,
Itarasi, MP
GOSAIN
6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt.,
Northern Railway Divisional Hospital,
Lucknow, UP
7. Kulbhushan Doval, Working as Lab. Supdt.,
Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP - Respondents
(Mr. Pradeep Kr. Sharma, Mr. Piyush Gaur for respondents 1 to 4, Mr.
Somnath Bhattacharya with Mr. Pradeep Tripathi for respondents 4 & 5
4
S/o Sh. Jai Prakash
O/o Zonal Office Building (MCD)
IIIrd Floor, Major Dist. Road,
Narela, Delhi-110040
7. Praveen (2022 Batch)
S/o Sh. R.S. Rana, O/o Zonal Office Building (MCD)
5, Rohini, Delhi - 110085. ... Respondents
(For Applicant(s) Advocate: Mr. MK Bhardwaj, Mr. Ajesh Luthra with
Mr. Jatin Parashar, Ms. Meenu Sharma)
(For Respondent(s) Advocate: Sr. Advocate Mr. Arun Bhardwaj with
Ms. Muskan Jain, Mr. Ashu Tiwari, Mr. Pranava Rastogi, Ms. Khushi
Sood, Ms. Anupama Bansal, Mr. Nikhil Beniwal, Mr. Pulkit Dulhan,
Mr. Gyanendra, Ms. Sanchita)
1
LALIT
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI
OA No.198/2017
Reserved on: 14.01.2026
Pronounced on: 04.02.2026
Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J)
Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A)
Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj,
Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway,
Central Hospital, New Delhi,
Aged about 47 years,
R/o 158/16, Railway Colony,
Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant
(By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal)
VERSUS
1. Union of India,
Through its Secretary,
Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan,
New Delhi
2. General Manager (P),
Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi
3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad)
Through its Chairman,
DRM Office Complex,
Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad
4. DRM (P)
Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP
5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad,
Working as Lab. Supdt.
Sub Divisional Railway Hospital,
Itarasi, MP
GOSAIN
6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt.,
Northern Railway Divisional Hospital,
Lucknow, UP
7. Kulbhushan Doval, Working as Lab. Supdt.,
Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP - Respondents
(Mr. Pradeep Kr. Sharma, Mr. Piyush Gaur for respondents 1 to 4, Mr.
Somnath Bhattacharya with Mr. Pradeep Tripathi for respondents 4 & 5
5
ORDER
Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J):
The issue involved in all the Original Applications is identical and therefore, with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, all the captioned OAs were heard together and are being disposed of by a common order. However, for the purpose of the present order, the facts are being taken from OA No. 1391/2025 (Anil Kumar) treating the same as the lead case.
2. Brief facts of the case are that both the applicants were appointed as Junior Engineer (Civil) in the years 1997 and 2000 respectively. After rendering six years of regular service as Junior Engineer (Civil), both the applicants became eligible for promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer (Civil) as per the Recruitment Rules circulated on 01.07.2004. Although both the applicants had completed the required years of service for promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer (Civil) in the years 2003 and 2010 respectively, they were not considered for promotion to the said post for want of vacancies.
3. Their claims for promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer (Civil) were eventually considered in the years 2010 and 2013 respectively. As both the applicants had outstanding service records, the Departmental Selection Committee declared them suitable and the said recommendations were accepted by the competent authority. On such acceptance, both the applicants were promoted as Assistant Engineer (Civil) vide orders dated 20.04.2010 and 01.01.2013. 1 LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS
1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi
2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi
3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad
4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP
5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.
Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP GOSAIN
6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP
7. Kulbhushan Doval, Working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP - Respondents (Mr. Pradeep Kr. Sharma, Mr. Piyush Gaur for respondents 1 to 4, Mr. Somnath Bhattacharya with Mr. Pradeep Tripathi for respondents 4 & 5 6
4. It is relevant to note that the post of Assistant Engineer (Civil) is filled by way of promotion as well as by direct recruitment. In Clause 11 of the Recruitment Rules, it has been clearly envisaged that 75% of the vacancies shall be filled by way of promotion failing which by direct recruitment and thereafter by deputation/absorption, and 25% by direct recruitment failing which by deputation/absorption. From the said clause of the Recruitment Rules it is evident that Junior Engineers (Civil), on completion of six years of regular service in the case of degree holders and eight years of regular service in the case of diploma holders, are required to be considered for promotion against available vacancies. In case eligible Junior Engineers are not available, the vacancies may be filled by direct recruitment. Similarly, in case direct recruits are not available in a particular year, the vacancies meant for the direct recruitment quota are to be filled by deputation/absorption.
5. According to the applicants, so far as the promotion quota is concerned, at no point of time was there any shortage of eligible Junior Engineers, which is evident from the seniority lists of Junior Engineers (Civil) circulated from time to time. Rather, the respondents delayed convening the Departmental Promotion Committee for regular promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer (Civil) and filled the available vacancies on ad hoc basis. The applicants were considered for promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer (Civil) after fulfilling the eligibility conditions prescribed in the Recruitment Rules and against clear vacancies. However, their promotions were treated as ad hoc merely because the respondents did not convene regular DPCs in accordance with the mandate of the 1 LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS
1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi
2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi
3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad
4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP
5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.
Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP GOSAIN
6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP
7. Kulbhushan Doval, Working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP - Respondents (Mr. Pradeep Kr. Sharma, Mr. Piyush Gaur for respondents 1 to 4, Mr. Somnath Bhattacharya with Mr. Pradeep Tripathi for respondents 4 & 5 7 Department of Personnel and Training instructions issued vide Office Memoranda dated 13.07.1989, 13.05.1991, 08.09.1998 and 24.12.2000.
6. In the Office Memorandum dated 14.12.2000 it was clearly mentioned that in case the DPC is not convened in time, the competent authority at the level of Joint Secretary/Addl. Commissioner in the case of MCD shall fix responsibility on the concerned officer who delayed the DPC for filling up the available vacancies on regular basis. The applicants were granted ad hoc promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer (Civil) vide order dated 25.10.2016. The respondents continued to fill the available vacancies of Assistant Engineer (Civil) but all such promotions were treated as ad hoc as evident from the promotion orders issued from time to time.
7. At the same time, the respondents initiated the process to fill up the direct recruitment quota by sending requisition to DSSSB. The said recruiting agency issued advertisement, finalised the recruitment process and sent recommendations to the respondents for appointment to the post of Assistant Engineer (Civil) against the direct recruitment quota. The private respondents were appointed as Assistant Engineers (Civil) against the direct recruitment quota and as per the quota of 75% for promotees and 25% for direct recruits, the direct recruit Assistant Engineers were required to be rotated by following the rota-quota principle.
8. Subsequently, the ad hoc promotion of the applicants as Assistant Engineer (Civil) was regularized by the respondents vide 1 LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS
1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi
2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi
3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad
4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP
5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.
Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP GOSAIN
6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP
7. Kulbhushan Doval, Working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP - Respondents (Mr. Pradeep Kr. Sharma, Mr. Piyush Gaur for respondents 1 to 4, Mr. Somnath Bhattacharya with Mr. Pradeep Tripathi for respondents 4 & 5 8 order dated 06.10.2023 (Annexure A-6). After issuing the said promotion order, the respondents issued a provisional seniority list as well as a final seniority list on 19.02.2025. After receiving the said seniority list, the applicants noticed that their objections submitted against the provisional seniority list dated 28.08.2024 had not been considered. At the same time, the respondents also ignored that after notifying the final seniority list of Assistant Engineers (Civil) on 19.02.2025, all the ad hoc promotions made to the post of Executive Engineer (Civil) without there being any seniority list of Assistant Engineers (Civil) were required to be reviewed.
9. In fact, in the guise of meeting the exigencies of service, the respondents had promoted the private respondents to the post of Executive Engineer (Civil) vide order dated 22.12.2022 without notifying the seniority list of Assistant Engineers (Civil). As per the rules and law on the subject, the respondents were required to issue the final seniority list of Assistant Engineers (Civil) before making further promotion to the post of Executive Engineer (Civil). However, in order to deprive the eligible Assistant Engineers (Civil)/applicants from promotion to the post of Executive Engineer (Civil) and to give undue benefit to some of the Assistant Engineers appointed against the direct recruitment quota, the respondents issued the impugned promotion order dated 22.12.2022.
10. It was also mentioned in the said promotion order dated 22.12.2022 itself that the same would be subject to review DPC etc. to the post of Assistant Engineer (Civil) as well as the outcome of court cases. However, the respondents did not review the said ad hoc 1 LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS
1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi
2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi
3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad
4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP
5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.
Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP GOSAIN
6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP
7. Kulbhushan Doval, Working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP - Respondents (Mr. Pradeep Kr. Sharma, Mr. Piyush Gaur for respondents 1 to 4, Mr. Somnath Bhattacharya with Mr. Pradeep Tripathi for respondents 4 & 5 9 promotions and instead initiated the process of promotion to the post of Executive Engineer (Civil) vide letter dated 19.02.2025. A perusal of the said letter shows that the respondents included the names of ineligible persons for promotion to the post of Executive Engineer (Civil). As per the Department of Personnel and Training instructions contained in Office Memoranda dated 06.01.2006 and 08.09.1998, for the purpose of promotion to the post of Executive Engineer (Civil), only the names of eligible officers could be included and not those Assistant Engineers who had not completed five years of regular service.
11. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that when the applicants attempted to ascertain the reasons for such illegality, they were informed that the respondents had followed the Department of Personnel and Training Office Memorandum dated 25.03.1996 which provides for incorporating a note in the Recruitment Rules to the effect that whenever juniors are considered for promotion, the seniors in the cadre are also required to be considered for promotion along with the juniors subject to the condition that the seniors are not short of half of the qualifying service prescribed in the Recruitment Rules or two years, whichever is less.
12. It was contended that while relying upon the said Office Memorandum, the respondents failed to consider that the OM does not automatically grant relaxation in the Recruitment Rules to the seniors. Such relaxation can be granted only after incorporation of the requisite note in the Recruitment Rules. Reliance was placed upon the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi dated 1 LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS
1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi
2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi
3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad
4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP
5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.
Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP GOSAIN
6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP
7. Kulbhushan Doval, Working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP - Respondents (Mr. Pradeep Kr. Sharma, Mr. Piyush Gaur for respondents 1 to 4, Mr. Somnath Bhattacharya with Mr. Pradeep Tripathi for respondents 4 & 5 10 01.07.2019 in WP (C) No. 1738/2017 & 4711/2017 wherein the Court observed as under:
"37. A perusal of the impugned decision of the Tribunal shows that the Tribunal has not bestowed its consideration to the issue whether it could, of its own, grant relaxation of the Recruitment Rules to the Direct Recruits, when the petitioner/ Union of India had refused to grant the said relaxation, and the petitioner/ Union of India had taken a stand justifying its refusal to relax the Recruitment Rules for promotion through LDCE to the post of Section Officer in the CSS. The Tribunal proceeds on the basis that the DOP&T OM dated 25.03.1996 mandatorily lays down that, in all cases where juniors are eligible under the Recruitment Rules and seniors are not so eligible for promotion, the Recruitment Rules would stand relaxed, so that the seniors could be considered for promotion.
38. When we read the OM dated 25.03.1996, and also the OM dated 24.09.1997, we do not find a definite and binding direction in the above terms issued by the Central Government, as contended by the Direct Recruits.
39. The OM dated 25.03.1996 was issued in pursuance of the earlier OM dated 18.03.1988. In respect of the OM dated 18.03.1988, it states that Para 3.2.7 of the said OM "suggested that a suitable", Note" may be inserted in the recruitment rules to the effect that seniors who have completed the probation period may also be considered for promotion when their juniors who have completed the requisite service are being considered" (emphasis supplied). Thus, from a reading of the O.M. dated 25.03.1996 it appears that so far as the OM dated 18.03.1988 is concerned, the DOP&T, itself understood the same as merely giving a "suggestion" for insertion of a suitable, Note". The OM dated 25.03.1996 then proceeds to notice the decision of the Supreme Court in R. Prabha Devi (supra). In the light of the said decision, it states that the Government has decided to amend Para 3.7.2 of Part III of the OM dated 18.03.1988. Para 3.7.2 of the OM dated 18.03.1988 was amended to read: -To avoid such a situation the following note may be inserted below the relevant service rules/column in the schedule to the Recruitment Rules:- -Where juniors who have completed their qualifying/eligibility service are being considered for promotion, their seniors would also be considered provided they are not short of the requisite qualifying/ eligibility service by more than half of such qualifying/ eligibility service or two years, which ever is less, and have successfully completed their probation period for promotion to the next higher grade alongwith their juniors who have already completed such qualifying / eligibility service. (emphasis supplied). Thus, once again, we find that even the amended para 3.I.2 of the OM dated 18.03.1988 only enabled the insertion of the relevant clause in the relevant service rules, to permit the seniors - who are short of requisite qualifying/ eligibility service, to participate in the promotion/ selection process along with their juniors who are eligible for such consideration for promotion, where the shortfall of qualifying/ eligibitity service is two years or less, The amended Para 3.1.2 of the O.M. dated 18.03.1988 did not purport to say that the insertion of the aforesaid clause is mandatory; or automatic; or that it shall be deemed to be inserted in the relevant Recruitment Rules.1
LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS
1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi
2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi
3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad
4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP
5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.
Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP GOSAIN
6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP
7. Kulbhushan Doval, Working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP - Respondents (Mr. Pradeep Kr. Sharma, Mr. Piyush Gaur for respondents 1 to 4, Mr. Somnath Bhattacharya with Mr. Pradeep Tripathi for respondents 4 & 5 11
52. We have already analyzed these office memoranda in the earlier part of our decision. In our view, the said office memoranda only enable and empower the concerned Ministry/ Department to amend the Recruitment Rules - if it considers it proper to do so, so as to enable the participation of the ineligible seniors in the promotion process, when the juniors who are eligible, are being considered. There is no binding and enforceable rule, or consequent vested right, in the seniors to seek enforcement of the said OMs. Much less is the right of such ineligible seniors to demand relaxation of the Recruitment Rules as a matter of right. The fact that the seniors in the cadre - who do not have the approved service for consideration for promotion, do not have any such vested right is clear from R. Prabha Devi (supra) and Palure Bhaskar Rao (supra). In the light of the decisions, it cannot be claimed that their exclusion from consideration in the promotion process since they are not eligible under the Recruitment Rules, leads to undue hardship or unfairness per se.
61. The said OM, firstly, fixes the crucial dates for determining the eligibility of officers for promotion, Paragraph 4 of the said OM sought to remind the Ministries/Departments to take steps in terms of OM dated 18.03.1988. It did not lay down, as a matter of rule or policy, that all Ministries/ Departments should mandatorily amend their Recruitment Rules. The interpretation of the OM dated 19.07.1989 was, evidently, not undertaken by the Supreme Court in Sadhana Khanna (supra), and it merely proceeded on the basis of the interpretation adopted by the Tribunal. Sadhana Khanna (supra) also shows that even though R. Prabha Devi (supra) was noticed by it in paragraph 9 of its decision, there was no discussion with regard to the law laid dorvn in R. Prabha Devi (supra), The decision in Sadhana Khanna (supra) proceeded on the assumption that the OM dated 19.07.1989 mandatorily required the Ministries/Departments to amend their Recruitment Rules to enable the seniors to be considered for promotion - when they have not completed the approved service, whenever their juniors - who are eligible, are considered. The decision in Sadhana Khanna (supra) would be a binding precedent only in that fact situation, and cannot be cited as a precedent in a fact situation where the OMs issued by the Government, from time to time, beginning 19.03.1988, do not mandatorily lay down that all the Ministries/ Departments of the Central Government should necessarily amend their Recruitment Rules so as to render the ineligible seniors as qualified to participate in the promotion process whenever their juniors who are eligible, are considered. Thus, in our view, the decision in Sadhana Khanna (supra) is of no avail to the Direct Recruits.
65. There is one other aspect which we wish to observe and state at this stage, we find that the Direct Recruits have come into the CSS as Direct Recruit Assistants, whereas the Promotees came into the CSS after rendering service in the central secretariat clerical Service (CSCS). Thus, the age band in which they fall is in the range of 45-55 years. However, the Direct Recruits are still very young and their age band is between 25-35 years. Thus, the "grave injustice"
that the Direct Recruits are crying about, in any event, is not something that would last during the lifetime of their service. since the prom6tees would be phased out of service much earlier in point of time on account of their superannuation, when compared to the Direct Recruits, the Direct Recruits would not, in any event, suffer a lasting disadvantage.1
LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS
1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi
2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi
3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad
4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP
5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.
Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP GOSAIN
6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP
7. Kulbhushan Doval, Working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP - Respondents (Mr. Pradeep Kr. Sharma, Mr. Piyush Gaur for respondents 1 to 4, Mr. Somnath Bhattacharya with Mr. Pradeep Tripathi for respondents 4 & 5 12
13. It was further submitted that the aforesaid judgment was assailed by the direct recruits by filing Special Leave Petitions which were registered as Diary No. 35367/2019. The said SLPs were dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 14.01.2020.
14. According to the counsel, a perusal of the aforesaid judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi as well as the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court clearly shows that the Office Memorandum dated 25.03.1996 cannot be made the basis to grant relaxation in the eligibility service for promotion to the higher post unless the Recruitment Rules themselves are amended to consider the seniors by relaxing the eligibility service.
15. It was argued that the respondents acted in violation of the aforesaid judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi as well as the Hon'ble Supreme Court by promoting the private respondents to the post of Executive Engineer (Civil) and Executive Engineer (Civil) LAC vide orders dated 22.12.2022 and 19.06.2025 by relaxing the eligibility service prescribed in the Recruitment Rules. As per the Recruitment Rules for the post of Executive Engineer (Civil), the private respondents were required to complete five years of service as Assistant Engineer (Civil) as on 01.01.2022 and 01.01.2025 respectively. However, none of the private respondents had completed five years of service as Assistant Engineer (Civil) as they had joined only in the years 2018-2019 and 2021-2022.
16. The counsel submitted that when the said private respondents were promoted as Executive Engineers (Civil), there was neither a 1 LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS
1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi
2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi
3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad
4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP
5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.
Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP GOSAIN
6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP
7. Kulbhushan Doval, Working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP - Respondents (Mr. Pradeep Kr. Sharma, Mr. Piyush Gaur for respondents 1 to 4, Mr. Somnath Bhattacharya with Mr. Pradeep Tripathi for respondents 4 & 5 13 seniority list of Assistant Engineers (Civil) nor had they completed the mandatory five years of service required for consideration for promotion. The said illegality ought to have been rectified by the Cadre Controlling Authority immediately or at least after the notification of the final seniority list of Assistant Engineers (Civil) in February 2025. Instead of rectifying the said illegality, the respondents again committed the same illegality by issuing the impugned letter dated 19.02.2025 and the LAC order dated 19.06.2025 including the names of Assistant Engineers who had not completed five years of service as on 01.01.2025.
17. The counsel further submitted that the applicants had earlier approached the Tribunal by filing OA No. 839/2025 challenging the action of the respondents, which came to be dismissed vide order dated 29.04.2025. Aggrieved by the said dismissal, the applicants filed Writ Petition (Civil) No. 6373/2025 before the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi. During the pendency of the said writ petition, the respondents issued yet another order dated 19.06.2025 assigning higher responsibilities to certain persons who were allegedly ineligible and junior to the applicants. The said action, according to the counsel, directly affects the service rights of the applicants in relation to their seniority, promotional avenues and entitlement to look-after charge.
18. In these circumstances, the applicants moved an application before the Hon'ble High Court seeking leave to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to file a fresh Original Application before the Tribunal to challenge the subsequent order dated 19.06.2025 and to 1 LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS
1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi
2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi
3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad
4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP
5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.
Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP GOSAIN
6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP
7. Kulbhushan Doval, Working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP - Respondents (Mr. Pradeep Kr. Sharma, Mr. Piyush Gaur for respondents 1 to 4, Mr. Somnath Bhattacharya with Mr. Pradeep Tripathi for respondents 4 & 5 14 seek appropriate directions for fixation of their seniority in accordance with law. It was also pointed out that earlier the applicants had filed OA No. 3613/2025 which was withdrawn with liberty to file a better OA.
19. Learned counsel further submitted that the impugned promotion order dated 22.12.2022 is a nullity in the eyes of law since the respondents promoted ineligible Assistant Engineers to the post of Executive Engineer (Civil). At the time of issuing the said promotion order, neither was there any seniority list of the feeder cadre nor had the private respondents completed the required five years of service. According to the counsel, such illegality was committed deliberately, resulting in junior and ineligible officers supervising their own seniors who had more than 10-15 years of service as Assistant Engineers.
20. It was further contended that the respondents have acted contrary to the Recruitment Rules as well as settled principles of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the Hon'ble High Courts. Reliance was placed on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Thiru K. Palaniswamy vs. M. Shanmugam & Ors., Civil Appeal No. 1392/2023 wherein it was held that actions must be taken strictly in accordance with the rules and not otherwise.
21. The counsel also submitted that both the applicants were promoted as Assistant Engineers in the years 2013 and 2016 and were therefore eligible for promotion to the post of Executive Engineer as on 01.01.2022 and 01.01.2025. The description of their 1 LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS
1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi
2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi
3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad
4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP
5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.
Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP GOSAIN
6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP
7. Kulbhushan Doval, Working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP - Respondents (Mr. Pradeep Kr. Sharma, Mr. Piyush Gaur for respondents 1 to 4, Mr. Somnath Bhattacharya with Mr. Pradeep Tripathi for respondents 4 & 5 15 promotions as ad hoc cannot deprive them of the benefit of the service rendered by them, especially when the promotions were granted after assessing their suitability by the competent authority and against clear vacancies. Reliance was placed on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Direct Recruit Class II Engineering Officers' Association v. State of Maharashtra & Ors., (1990) 2 SCC 715 wherein it is held as under:-
"(A) Once an incumbent is appointed to a post according to rule, his seniority has to be counted from the date of his appointment and not according to the date of his confirmation.
The corollary of the above rule is that where the initial appointment is only ad hoc and not according to rules and made as a stop-gap arrangement, the officiation in such post cannot be taken into account for considering the seniority. (B) If the initial appointment is not made by following the procedure laid down by the rules but the appointee continues in the post uninterruptedly till the regularization of his service in accordance with the rules, the period of officiating service will be counted. (C) When appointments are made from more than one source, it is permissible to fix the ratio for recruitment from the different sources, and if rules are framed in this regard they must ordinarily be followed strictly. (D) If it becomes impossible to adhere to the existing quota rule, it should be substituted by an appropriate rule to meet the needs of the situation. In case, however, the quota rule is not followed continuously for a number of years because it was impossible to do so the inference is irresistible that the quota rule had broken down.
(E) Where the quota rule has broken down and the appoint- ments are made from one source in excess of the quota, but are made after following the procedure prescribed by the rules for the appointment, the appointees should not be pushed down below the appointees from the other source inducted in the service at a later date.
(F) Where the rules permit the authorities to relax the provisions relating to the quota, ordinarily a presumption should be raised that there was such relaxation when there is a deviation from the quota rule.
1 LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS
1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi
2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi
3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad
4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP
5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.
Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP GOSAIN
6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP
7. Kulbhushan Doval, Working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP - Respondents (Mr. Pradeep Kr. Sharma, Mr. Piyush Gaur for respondents 1 to 4, Mr. Somnath Bhattacharya with Mr. Pradeep Tripathi for respondents 4 & 5 16 (G) The quota for recruitment from the different sources may be prescribed by executive instructions, if the rules are silent on the subject.
(H) If the quota rule is prescribed by an executive instruction, and is not followed continuously for a number of years, the inference is that the executive instruction has ceased to remain operative.
(I) The posts held by the permanent Deputy Engineers as well as the officiating Deputy Engineers under the State of Maharashtra belonged to the single cadre of Deputy Engineers.
(J) The decision dealing with important questions concerning a particular service given after careful consideration should be respected rather than scrutinized for finding out any possible error. It is not in the interest of Service to unsettle a settled position."
(Emphasis Supplied)
22. He has further placed reliance on the decision of the Tribunal in OA No. 3019 of 2016 (Harish Pal Singh & Ors. vs. NDMC & Ors.) dated 15.10.2025 wherein it was observed as under:-
"17. It is also well-settled in service jurisprudence that money is not the only motivator for a government servant. Employees value recognition of their service, career progression, dignity of position, and parity with similarly placed colleagues as much as, if not more than, mere monetary benefits. The conferment of a higher scale or the release of arrears of pay does not, by itself, compensate for the denial of seniority, promotional avenues, and the status that flows from being treated as a regularly appointed officer. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in several cases, including in Direct Recruit Class II Engineering Officers' Association (supra), as well as recently in the Constitution Bench judgment of Tej Prakash Pathak & Ors. v. Rajasthan High Court & Ors., reported in (2025) 2 SCC 1, and in Partha Das v. Sujan Roy & Ors., reported in 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1844, has recognized that legitimate expectation, fairness in action, and equality of treatment under Articles 14 and 16 are fundamental to public service. A mere financial adjustment cannot erase the stigma of being labelled as 'ad hoc' or 'irregular' when the individual has fulfilled all eligibility criteria, occupied substantive vacancies, and discharged the full responsibilities of the promotional post for about decades. Furthermore, career advancement carries with it intangible yet significant benefits such as professional recognition, authority to discharge higher responsibilities, enhanced opportunities for future promotion, and social standing within the service. These intrinsic aspects of public employment cannot be reduced to a monetary calculation. Accordingly, the contention of the respondents that the grant of a higher scale or financial upgradation is sufficient ignores the constitutional and legal principle that equality and fairness in service conditions encompass not only pay 1 LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS
1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi
2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi
3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad
4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP
5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.
Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP GOSAIN
6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP
7. Kulbhushan Doval, Working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP - Respondents (Mr. Pradeep Kr. Sharma, Mr. Piyush Gaur for respondents 1 to 4, Mr. Somnath Bhattacharya with Mr. Pradeep Tripathi for respondents 4 & 5 17 but also seniority, promotion, and status. In other words, the applicants' grievance is not merely pecuniary, it goes to the core of their service rights and legitimate expectations, which are protected under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. At this stage, we observe that although, as per the averments of the respondents, the applicants were granted DTL scales and, consequent upon the change in the Grade Pay structure, the post of AE was elevated to a Category 'A' post, their ad hoc promotions were never regularised through a duly convened DPC. It is evident that respondent Nos. 1 and 2 continued to utilise the services of the applicants on an ad hoc basis for a prolonged period of 15-20 years, without taking steps to regularise their promotions through the prescribed procedure of a regular DPC.
18. This Tribunal has repeatedly observed that service matters concerning the engineering staff of the respondents' organisation are being dealt with in a most lackadaisical manner, thereby giving rise to avoidable litigation. Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 are, therefore, directed to bestow their personal attention towards resolving the grievances of the aforesaid engineering staff, keeping in view the settled principles of service jurisprudence as well as the applicable departmental rules and regulations.
19. In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case, for the foregoing reasons and guiding dicta of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the Hon'ble High Courts, as noted above, the present OA is allowed in the following terms:
(i) The respondents are directed to treat the applicants' promotions to the post of EE (C) as regular from the respective dates of their ad hoc promotions;
(ii) The respondents shall convene year-wise review DPCs to consider the case of the applicants for promotion to the higher posts, i.e., SE (C), Additional Chief Engineer (C), and Chief Engineer (C), subject to their fulfilling the eligibility conditions prescribed under the relevant Recruitment Regulations prevailing at that point in time, and subject further to the availability of vacancies in the respective years."
and further the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in WP(C) No. 4396/2024 (MCD v. Rakesh Gupta).
23. It was further argued that the respondents cannot be permitted to take advantage of their own wrong by delaying the DPCs for years together and then denying the applicants the benefit of promotion on the basis of such delay. The action of the respondents was stated to 1 LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS
1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi
2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi
3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad
4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP
5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.
Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP GOSAIN
6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP
7. Kulbhushan Doval, Working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP - Respondents (Mr. Pradeep Kr. Sharma, Mr. Piyush Gaur for respondents 1 to 4, Mr. Somnath Bhattacharya with Mr. Pradeep Tripathi for respondents 4 & 5 18 be arbitrary, illegal and in violation of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.
24. The counsel also relied upon various judgments including Sunil Kumar Mehra vs. MCD, N.R. Chaudhary vs. MCD, Suresh Chandra vs. North DMC, Rajender Singh vs. Union of India, Chief Engineer UT Chandigarh vs. Ram Swarup Walia and Major General H.M. Singh vs. Union of India to contend that delay in holding DPC cannot be made a ground to deny legitimate promotional benefits.
25. It was finally submitted that the respondents have acted in disregard of binding judicial precedents and by not following the judgments of the Hon'ble High Court and the Hon'ble Supreme Court they have undermined the rule of law. In support of this contention, reliance was placed on decisions including East India Commercial Co. Ltd. v. Collector of Customs, Makhan Lal v. State of Jammu and Kashmir, Baradakanta Mishra v. Bhimsen Dixit,
26. In Re: M.P. Dwivedi & Ors., and T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Ashok Khot. The counsel submitted that non- compliance with binding judicial pronouncements amounts to contempt and undermines the authority of the courts and the rule of law.
27. Counsel for the respondents has filed the counter affidavit and submitted that the Applicants were appointed as Junior Engineer (Civil) from the dates as mentioned in the details annexed as Annexure R-1. The next higher post for Junior Engineer (Civil) is 1 LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS
1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi
2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi
3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad
4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP
5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.
Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP GOSAIN
6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP
7. Kulbhushan Doval, Working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP - Respondents (Mr. Pradeep Kr. Sharma, Mr. Piyush Gaur for respondents 1 to 4, Mr. Somnath Bhattacharya with Mr. Pradeep Tripathi for respondents 4 & 5 19 Assistant Engineer (Civil). As per the existing notified Recruitment Rules (RRs) to the post of Assistant Engineer (Civil), Junior Engineers (Civil) with 06 years regular service in the grade for those possessing Degree in Civil Engineering and 08 years regular service for those possessing Diploma in Civil Engineering are eligible for promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer (Civil). The Applicants were promoted to the post of Assistant Engineer on ad-hoc basis from the date as mentioned in Annexure R-1. It has been gathered from the records that the ad-hoc promotions during the said period were also made after including the vacancies of direct recruitment quota. In the year 2012, the erstwhile MCD was trifurcated and three Corporations namely North Delhi Municipal Corporation (NDMC), South Delhi Municipal Corporation (SDMC) and East Delhi Municipal Corporation (EDMC) came into existence. Further, the matter of promotion in respect of all three Corporations was dealt with by the erstwhile North DMC and the matter of direct recruitment in respect of all three Corporations was dealt with by erstwhile South DMC. DPCs to the post of Assistant Engineer (Civil) were held on 23.03.2006, 14.06.2007, 02.08.2007 and 02.03.2009 in the erstwhile MCD. These DPCs were reviewed in the year 2011 and thereafter again on 22.09.2015 and 25.07.2019 by the Engineering Department of erstwhile North DMC being the nodal Corporation for promotion. In the year 2021, a meeting of Commissioners of all three Corporations i.e. North, South and East DMC was held on 30.12.2021 wherein service matters including court cases, review DPC/DSC and grievances of officers of Category "A" were discussed for smooth functioning of all three Corporations. In the said meeting it was 1 LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS
1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi
2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi
3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad
4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP
5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.
Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP GOSAIN
6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP
7. Kulbhushan Doval, Working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP - Respondents (Mr. Pradeep Kr. Sharma, Mr. Piyush Gaur for respondents 1 to 4, Mr. Somnath Bhattacharya with Mr. Pradeep Tripathi for respondents 4 & 5 20 decided that each Corporation shall henceforth conduct and deal with all service matters including court cases, review DPC/DSC and any individual or joint grievances of its officers of Category "A" posts at its own level separately in respect of matters pertaining to prior or after trifurcation after issuance of separate seniority list in respective corporations and the same was to be implemented with immediate effect under intimation to DLB. In pursuance of the Gazette Notification vide Notification No. CG-DL-E-18052022-235827 dated 18.05.2022 issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs, Municipal Corporation of Delhi has been constituted. Keeing in view the review of the original DPC dated 23.03.2006, 14.06.2007, 02.08.2007 and 02.03.2009 (earlier reviewed in the year 2011 and thereafter on 22.09.2015 and 25.07.2019) and thereafter regular DPC for vacancy year 2009-10 to 2023 for regular promotion of Junior Engineer (Civil) to the post of Assistant Engineer (Civil), officers from Finance Wing, Legal Wing, Administrative Wing and Liaison Officer (MCD) as representative of SC/ST were also included.
28. Counsel for the respondents submitted that the meeting of the Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) was held on 05.09.2023 under the chairmanship of Addl. Commissioner (Estt.) to review the original DPC dated 23.03.2006, 14.06.2007, 02.08.2007 and 02.03.2009 (earlier reviewed in the year 2011 and thereafter on 22.09.2015 and 25.07.2019) and thereafter regular DPC for vacancy year 2009-10 to 2023 for regular promotion of Junior Engineer (Civil) to the post of Assistant Engineer (Civil). 1 LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS
1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi
2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi
3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad
4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP
5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.
Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP GOSAIN
6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP
7. Kulbhushan Doval, Working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP - Respondents (Mr. Pradeep Kr. Sharma, Mr. Piyush Gaur for respondents 1 to 4, Mr. Somnath Bhattacharya with Mr. Pradeep Tripathi for respondents 4 & 5 21
29. It is further submitted that the DPC, after considering all relevant facts viz. Recruitment Rules, DoPT guidelines, reservation rules, year-wise vacancy positions including vacancies of SC/ST/PH category, qualifying service required as per RRs, zone of consideration of eligible officials, vigilance reports, currency of punishment reports and assessment of suitability as per relevant Recruitment Rules recommended the applicants for promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer (Civil) on regular basis for the vacancy/panel year(s) as annexed in the Minutes of the DPC-2023 Annexure R-2 and consequent upon approval of the Competent Authority they were promoted to the post of AE (Civil) with prospective effect i.e. w.e.f. 06.10.2023 vide Office Order No. F.2(29)/CED/MCD/2023/G.F-29/3879 dated 06.10.2023 and subsequent orders.
30. Counsel for the respondents also argued that Para 6.4 of DoPT O.M. No. 22011/5/86-Estt.(D) dated 10.04.1989 provides preparation of year-wise panels by DPC where the DPC has not met for a number of years and the instructions contained in para 6.4.1, 6.4.2 and 6.4.4 state that the first DPC that meets thereafter should determine year-wise vacancies, prepare year-wise panels and while promotions shall be made in the order of consolidated select list, such promotions shall have only prospective effect even in cases where the vacancies relate to earlier years.
31. It is also submitted that it is evident from Para 6.4.4 of DoPT O.M. No. 22011/5/86-Estt.(D) dated 10.04.1989 that promotions will have only prospective effect even in cases where the vacancies relate 1 LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS
1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi
2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi
3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad
4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP
5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.
Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP GOSAIN
6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP
7. Kulbhushan Doval, Working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP - Respondents (Mr. Pradeep Kr. Sharma, Mr. Piyush Gaur for respondents 1 to 4, Mr. Somnath Bhattacharya with Mr. Pradeep Tripathi for respondents 4 & 5 22 to earlier year(s). Accordingly, the applicants who were recommended by the DPC for promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer (Civil) on regular basis for vacancy/panel year(s) 2009-10 to 2023 have been promoted to the post of AE (Civil) with prospective effect i.e. w.e.f. 06.10.2023.
32. Counsel for the respondents submitted as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Civil Appeal No. 8833-8835 of 2019 in K. Meghachandra Singh & Ors. Vs. Ningam Siro & Ors. revised instructions relating to seniority of direct recruits and promotees and inter-se seniority thereof have been issued by DoPT vide O.M. No. 20011/2/2019-Estt.(D) dated 13.08.2021. The said instructions clarify that seniority of direct recruits and promotees shall be reckoned with reference to the year of their actual appointment and not from the year of vacancy or initiation of recruitment process and the earlier law laid down in N.R. Parmar v. Union of India & Others stands overruled.
33. It is further argued by the respondents' counsel that a compilation of all relevant instructions on the subject of determination of seniority has also been issued by DoPT on 16.09.2022 wherein para 2.4.6 reiterates the principles laid down in DoPT O.M. No. 20011/2/2019-Estt.(D) dated 13.08.2021 issued pursuant to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in K. Meghachandra Singh & Ors. Vs. Ningam Siro & Ors. Accordingly the seniority position of the applicants in the cadre of Assistant Engineer (Civil) has been assigned as per DoPT O.M. No. 20011/2/2019-Estt.(D) dated 13.08.2021 from the date of 1 LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS
1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi
2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi
3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad
4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP
5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.
Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP GOSAIN
6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP
7. Kulbhushan Doval, Working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP - Respondents (Mr. Pradeep Kr. Sharma, Mr. Piyush Gaur for respondents 1 to 4, Mr. Somnath Bhattacharya with Mr. Pradeep Tripathi for respondents 4 & 5 23 appointment as AE (Civil) on regular basis i.e. w.e.f. 06.10.2023 and therefore officials appointed under Direct Recruitment quota on the basis of declaration of results of DSSSB in 2018 and 2021 have been placed above the applicants in the seniority list. A provisional seniority list of Assistant Engineer (Civil) was issued vide Circular No. F.8(45)/CED/MCD/2024/GF-59/3379 dated 28.08.2024 inviting objections from stakeholders. However, the applicants did not file any objection against the said provisional seniority list and all officials who filed objections were granted personal hearing before the Addl. Commissioner (Estt.) on 20.11.2024.
34. It is submitted that after considering the representations and objections of the officials in accordance with DoPT O.M. No. 20011/2/2019-Estt.(D) dated 13.08.2021 issued pursuant to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in K. Meghachandra Singh & Ors. Vs. Ningam Siro & Ors., the seniority list of Assistant Engineer (Civil) was finalized and circulated vide Circular No. F.8(45)/CED/MCD/2024/2025/GF-05/6778 dated 19.02.2025. Since the applicants did not file objections to the provisional seniority list dated 28.08.2024, they cannot now claim advantage of their own inaction.
35. It is submitted by the respondents' counsel that in the order dated 12.09.2024 passed by the Hon'ble Central Administrative Tribunal in OA No. 3338/2024 titled Ramesh Kumar Goel Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi it was recorded that the provisional seniority list of AE (Civil) had been issued on 28.08.2024 inviting objections and that the Department Screening Committee (DSC) 1 LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS
1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi
2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi
3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad
4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP
5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.
Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP GOSAIN
6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP
7. Kulbhushan Doval, Working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP - Respondents (Mr. Pradeep Kr. Sharma, Mr. Piyush Gaur for respondents 1 to 4, Mr. Somnath Bhattacharya with Mr. Pradeep Tripathi for respondents 4 & 5 24 would be deferred and processed only after publication of the final seniority list. After finalization of the seniority list dated 19.02.2025 and as more than 40 posts of Executive Engineer (Civil) are vacant, the process of promotion to the post of Executive Engineer (Civil) has been initiated and documents of eligible officials including the applicants have been called from the concerned departments.
36. Counsel for the respondents has drawn our attention to the order dated 05.03.2025 of this Tribunal in OA No. 839/2025 titled Dhirendra Kumar & Ors. Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi wherein it was directed that respondent MCD shall maintain status quo regarding the seniority list dated 19.02.2025. However, the said matter being OA No. 839/2025 has already been dismissed by the Hon'ble Central Administrative Tribunal vide order dated 29.04.2025. It is submitted that the seniority list dated 19.02.2025 was issued strictly in accordance with DoPT O.M. No. 20011/2/2019-Estt.(D) dated 13.08.2021 and the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in K. Meghachandra Singh & Ors. Vs. Ningam Siro & Ors. and after due consideration of objections and approval of the competent authority. After unification of the erstwhile Corporations, the Municipal Corporation of Delhi came into existence w.e.f. 22.05.2022 and the Executive Engineers (Civil) perform several obligatory functions of the Corporation. Therefore, keeping in view the exigencies of work and smooth functioning of municipal administration, the Department Screening Committee dated 16.12.2022 recommended ad-hoc promotion to the post of Executive Engineer (Civil) and accordingly 40 Assistant Engineers (Civil) including 7 direct recruit AEs were promoted on ad-hoc basis vide 1 LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS
1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi
2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi
3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad
4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP
5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.
Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP GOSAIN
6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP
7. Kulbhushan Doval, Working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP - Respondents (Mr. Pradeep Kr. Sharma, Mr. Piyush Gaur for respondents 1 to 4, Mr. Somnath Bhattacharya with Mr. Pradeep Tripathi for respondents 4 & 5 25 Office Order No. F.7(11)/CED/MCD/Pt.XVIII/2022/G.F-77/3770 dated 22.12.2022.
37. It is argued that all actions taken by the respondents including conduct of DPC on 05.09.2023, issuance of promotion orders dated 06.10.2023, preparation of seniority list dated 19.02.2025 and initiation of promotion to the post of Executive Engineer (Civil) have been strictly in accordance with the Recruitment Rules, DoPT guidelines and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in K. Meghachandra Singh & Ors. Vs. Ningam Siro & Ors.
38. Counsel for the respondents placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Rashi Mani Mishra v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2021)17 SCC 399. It was submitted that the said decision clearly settles the principle that service rendered on an ad hoc basis prior to regularisation cannot be counted for the purpose of determining seniority. The respondents explained that in the said case, Assistant Engineers were initially appointed on an ad hoc basis in 1985 and their services were later regularised in 1989 under the relevant Regularisation Rules. Although a later seniority list attempted to count their ad hoc service for determining seniority, the Supreme Court held that such an approach was contrary to the applicable statutory rules. The Court observed that the relevant service and seniority rules treated only a substantive appointment made in accordance with the rules as the basis for determining seniority. Since ad hoc appointments are temporary in nature and not made in accordance with the prescribed rules for regular appointment, the period of such ad hoc service cannot be counted 1 LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS
1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi
2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi
3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad
4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP
5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.
Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP GOSAIN
6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP
7. Kulbhushan Doval, Working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP - Respondents (Mr. Pradeep Kr. Sharma, Mr. Piyush Gaur for respondents 1 to 4, Mr. Somnath Bhattacharya with Mr. Pradeep Tripathi for respondents 4 & 5 26 towards seniority. The Court further held that an earlier decision which had counted ad hoc service was rendered per incuriam as it failed to consider binding precedents and the relevant statutory provisions. Accordingly, the Supreme Court restored the earlier seniority list which counted seniority only from the date of regularisation and not from the date of ad hoc appointment. On the strength of this judgment, the respondents argued that the applicants cannot claim seniority or other consequential service benefits from the period during which they were working on an ad hoc basis as Assistant Engineers. According to the respondents, seniority can only be reckoned from the date of their regular appointment, i.e., 06.10.2023, when the applicants were promoted to the post of Assistant Engineer (Civil) on a regular basis pursuant to the DPC held in 2023. It was also pointed out that the applicant Anil Kumar had earlier been a party in Anil Kumar v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi which was dismissed by the Tribunal. The respondents contended that the applicant had the opportunity to raise all related issues in the said proceedings but failed to obtain relief. Therefore, the present proceedings raising substantially similar grievances are not maintainable and deserve to be rejected.
39. We have heard the learned counsel for the applicants as well as the learned counsel appearing for the respondents and have carefully perused the pleadings and documents placed on record.
40. At the outset, it is pertinent to note that one of the applicants in the present lead case, namely Anil Kumar, had earlier approached this Tribunal by filing OA No. 839/2025 along with other applicants 1 LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS
1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi
2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi
3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad
4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP
5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.
Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP GOSAIN
6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP
7. Kulbhushan Doval, Working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP - Respondents (Mr. Pradeep Kr. Sharma, Mr. Piyush Gaur for respondents 1 to 4, Mr. Somnath Bhattacharya with Mr. Pradeep Tripathi for respondents 4 & 5 27 challenging the action of the respondents relating to the seniority list and consequential service matters. The said Original Application was dismissed by this Tribunal vide order dated 29.04.2025. It is evident from the record that the issues relating to seniority and the consequential promotional implications were available to the applicants even at the time of filing the earlier Original Application. The applicant Anil Kumar, being a party to the said proceedings, had full opportunity to raise all grounds which he now seeks to urge in the present Original Applications. Having failed to obtain relief in the earlier proceedings, the applicants cannot be permitted to reopen substantially similar issues by instituting a fresh round of litigation. The principle of finality of judicial proceedings requires that matters which were or could have been raised in earlier proceedings cannot be reagitated repeatedly before the Tribunal.
41. Even otherwise, on merits also we do not find any illegality in the action of the respondents. It is not in dispute that the applicants were initially promoted to the post of Assistant Engineer on an ad hoc basis and that their promotions were regularized only pursuant to the recommendations of the Departmental Promotion Committee held on 05.09.2023. The respondents have placed on record that the said DPC was convened to review earlier DPCs and to consider year- wise vacancies for the period from 2009-10 onwards. After examining the Recruitment Rules, vigilance status, eligibility conditions and other relevant factors, the DPC recommended the applicants for regular promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer. Consequent upon the approval of the competent authority, the applicants were promoted on regular basis with prospective effect from 06.10.2023. 1 LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS
1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi
2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi
3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad
4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP
5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.
Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP GOSAIN
6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP
7. Kulbhushan Doval, Working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP - Respondents (Mr. Pradeep Kr. Sharma, Mr. Piyush Gaur for respondents 1 to 4, Mr. Somnath Bhattacharya with Mr. Pradeep Tripathi for respondents 4 & 5 28
42. We also find substance in the contentions of Mr. Arun Bhardwaj, learned Senior Counsel for the respondents that the judgments relied upon by the applicants are clearly distinguishable on facts. In the cases relied upon by the applicants, the courts were dealing with situations where either the nature of the initial appointment was not purely ad hoc or the appointments, though termed ad hoc, were made after following a procedure substantially in consonance with the Recruitment Rules. Further, in those cases, the specific terms and conditions governing the ad hoc appointments were either not brought on record or were materially different from those applicable in the present case. Therefore, the ratio of the said judgments cannot be mechanically applied to the facts of the present case.
43. It is also pertinent to observe that in the present case, the terms and conditions of the applicants' ad hoc promotions assume significant importance. The record indicates that the applicants were promoted on ad hoc basis subject to explicit conditions, including that such promotion was purely temporary, did not confer any right to regular appointment, and would not count for the purpose of seniority or further promotion. Such stipulations are neither incidental nor inconsequential; rather, they define the very character of the appointment. The applicants, having accepted the ad hoc promotions with full knowledge of these conditions, cannot subsequently claim benefits contrary to the express terms governing their appointment.
44. The law is well settled that the nature of an appointment must be determined not merely by the designation or duration of service, but 1 LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS
1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi
2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi
3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad
4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP
5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.
Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP GOSAIN
6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP
7. Kulbhushan Doval, Working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP - Respondents (Mr. Pradeep Kr. Sharma, Mr. Piyush Gaur for respondents 1 to 4, Mr. Somnath Bhattacharya with Mr. Pradeep Tripathi for respondents 4 & 5 29 by the manner in which the appointment is made and the conditions attached thereto. Where an appointment is expressly made as a stop- gap or ad hoc arrangement, pending regular selection in accordance with the Recruitment Rules, and is accompanied by clear conditions denying any claim to seniority or regularisation, such service cannot be equated with service rendered on a substantive basis. In the present case, the applicants' ad hoc promotions were not only dehors the regular DPC process but were also governed by specific conditions excluding any claim to seniority.
45. In view of the above, we are of the considered opinion that the judgments relied upon by the applicants do not advance their case. On the contrary, the facts of the present case are squarely covered by the settled principle that ad hoc service, rendered subject to explicit conditions and not in accordance with the prescribed Recruitment Rules, cannot be counted for the purpose of seniority or other consequential service benefits.
46. The respondents have relied upon paragraph 6.4 of the Department of Personnel and Training Office Memorandum dated 10.04.1989 which deals with situations where DPCs have not been held for a number of years. The said instructions clearly provide that the first DPC that meets thereafter should determine the year-wise vacancies and prepare year-wise panels, but promotions shall be made in the order of the consolidated select list and such promotions will have only prospective effect even if the vacancies relate to earlier years. In view of the aforesaid binding executive instructions, the 1 LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS
1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi
2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi
3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad
4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP
5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.
Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP GOSAIN
6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP
7. Kulbhushan Doval, Working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP - Respondents (Mr. Pradeep Kr. Sharma, Mr. Piyush Gaur for respondents 1 to 4, Mr. Somnath Bhattacharya with Mr. Pradeep Tripathi for respondents 4 & 5 30 action of the respondents in granting regular promotion to the applicants with prospective effect cannot be faulted.
47. The principal grievance of the applicants is that their ad hoc service as Assistant Engineers should be taken into account for determining their seniority. However, the issue is no longer res integra. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rashi Mani Mishra v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors., (2021)17 SCC 399 has categorically held that service rendered on an ad hoc basis prior to regularisation cannot be counted for the purpose of determining seniority unless the applicable rules specifically provide otherwise. The Hon'ble Supreme Court further clarified that seniority must be determined with reference to the date of substantive appointment made in accordance with the rules. In the present case, the substantive appointment of the applicants to the post of Assistant Engineer took place only upon their regular promotion on 06.10.2023. Therefore, their claim for counting the earlier ad hoc period for the purpose of seniority cannot be accepted.
48. The respondents have also shown that the seniority list dated 19.02.2025 has been prepared in accordance with the Department of Personnel and Training Office Memorandum dated 13.08.2021 issued pursuant to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of K. Meghachandra Singh v. Ningam Siro. The said instructions clarify that the inter se seniority between direct recruits and promotees is to be reckoned from the date of their actual appointment to the post and not from the year of vacancy or initiation of recruitment. Consequently, the direct recruit Assistant 1 LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS
1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi
2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi
3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad
4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP
5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.
Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP GOSAIN
6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP
7. Kulbhushan Doval, Working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP - Respondents (Mr. Pradeep Kr. Sharma, Mr. Piyush Gaur for respondents 1 to 4, Mr. Somnath Bhattacharya with Mr. Pradeep Tripathi for respondents 4 & 5 31 Engineers who were appointed earlier through the recruitment process conducted by DSSSB have been placed above the applicants who were regularly promoted only in October 2023. This arrangement is consistent with the binding legal position laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and therefore does not call for interference.
49. We also find from the record that a provisional seniority list dated 28.08.2024 was circulated inviting objections from all concerned officials. The respondents have specifically stated that the applicants did not submit any objection against the said provisional seniority list. After considering the objections received from other officers and granting personal hearings, the competent authority finalized the seniority list on 19.02.2025. In these circumstances, the applicants cannot now challenge the finalized seniority list after having failed to avail the opportunity provided at the appropriate stage.
50. The applicants have heavily relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Direct Recruit Class II Engineering Officers' Association v. State of Maharashtra to contend that the period of officiating service should be counted for the purpose of seniority. However, the facts of the present case are clearly distinguishable. The principle laid down in the said judgment applies in situations where the initial appointment is made according to the rules and the employee continues uninterruptedly in the post until regularization. In the present case, the applicants themselves have admitted that their promotions to the post of Assistant Engineer were 1 LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS
1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi
2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi
3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad
4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP
5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.
Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP GOSAIN
6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP
7. Kulbhushan Doval, Working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP - Respondents (Mr. Pradeep Kr. Sharma, Mr. Piyush Gaur for respondents 1 to 4, Mr. Somnath Bhattacharya with Mr. Pradeep Tripathi for respondents 4 & 5 32 made on an ad hoc basis and not through a regular DPC in accordance with the Recruitment Rules. Their substantive appointment to the cadre occurred only after the DPC held in September 2023. Therefore, the ratio of the aforesaid judgment does not assist the applicants.
51. Similarly, the reliance placed by the applicants on the decision of the Tribunal in Harish Pal Singh and other decisions cited in the pleadings is misplaced as those cases arose in different factual and statutory contexts where prolonged ad hoc service was considered in the backdrop of specific service regulations and circumstances. The facts of the present case are materially different inasmuch as the respondents have regularized the promotions through a duly constituted DPC and have fixed seniority in accordance with the prevailing DoPT instructions and the law declared by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
52. The applicants have also assailed the ad hoc promotions made to the post of Executive Engineer vide order dated 22.12.2022. The respondents have explained that these promotions were made on the recommendation of the Department Screening Committee purely on ad hoc basis in view of the exigencies of administration and the large number of vacancies in the post of Executive Engineer after the reunification of the Municipal Corporation. Such temporary arrangements made to ensure smooth functioning of the administration cannot be treated as conferring any substantive right of promotion, nor can they form the basis for altering the settled principles governing seniority and eligibility. 1 LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS
1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi
2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi
3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad
4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP
5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.
Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP GOSAIN
6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP
7. Kulbhushan Doval, Working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP - Respondents (Mr. Pradeep Kr. Sharma, Mr. Piyush Gaur for respondents 1 to 4, Mr. Somnath Bhattacharya with Mr. Pradeep Tripathi for respondents 4 & 5 33
53. In view of the above discussion, we are of the considered opinion that the actions taken by the respondents in conducting the DPC on 05.09.2023, issuing promotion orders dated 06.10.2023, preparing the seniority list dated 19.02.2025 and initiating the process for promotion to the post of Executive Engineer are in consonance with the applicable Recruitment Rules, the instructions issued by the Department of Personnel and Training and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
54. For the reasons stated above, we do not find any merit in both the Original Applications. The same are accordingly dismissed. Pending MA(s), if any, also stands disposed of. No order as to costs.
(Dr. Sumeet Jerath) (Harvinder Kaur Oberoi) Member (A) Member (J) /lg/ 1 LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS
1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi
2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi
3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad
4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP
5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.
Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP GOSAIN
6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP
7. Kulbhushan Doval, Working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP - Respondents (Mr. Pradeep Kr. Sharma, Mr. Piyush Gaur for respondents 1 to 4, Mr. Somnath Bhattacharya with Mr. Pradeep Tripathi for respondents 4 & 5