Central Administrative Tribunal - Jaipur
Rajkumar Gurjar vs M/O Railways on 9 September, 2020
1
OA No. 291/278/2019
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR
ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO. 291/278/2019
DATE OF ORDER: 09.09.2020
CORAM
HON'BLE MR. DINESH SHARMA, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER
HON'BLE MRS. HINA P. SHAH, JUDICIAL MEMBER
1. Raj Kumar Gurjar S/o Sh. Bhanwar Lal Gurjar,
Aged about 21 years, Resident of Quarter No.
477-C, New Railway Colony, Near Ambedkar
Institute, Kota Junction, Kota, Rajasthan, PIN
Code: 324002.
....Applicant No. 1
2. Bhanwar Lal Gurjar S/o Sh. Kalyan Gurjar, Aged
about 58 years, Resident of Quarter No. 477-C,
New Railway Colony, Near Ambedkar Institute,
Kota Junction, Kota, Rajasthan, PIN Code:
324002.
Applicant No. 2
Shri Satish Pachori, counsel for applicants (through
Video Conference.
VERSUS
Union of India through
1. General Manager, West Central Railway Zonal
Headquarter, Railway Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh,
PIN Code: 482001.
2
OA No. 291/278/2019
2. Divisional Railway Manager (Establishment), West
Central Railway, Kota Junction, Kota, Rajasthan,
PIN Code: 324006.
...Non-Applicants
Shri Y.K. Sharma, counsel for respondents (through
Video Conference.
ORDER (Oral)
Per: Hina P. Shah, Judicial Member The applicants have filed the present Original Application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 seeking for the following reliefs:
"(i). quash and set aside the order dated 15.11.2017 of the respondent No. 2;
(ii) quash and set aside the impugned order dated 15.11.2017 (Annexure-A-1);
(iii) direct the respondents to appoint applicant on the post of Helper in Group-D Railway Service under guaranteed Employment liberalization active service retirement Scheme July 2017. (Larges Planning July 2017);
(iv) May also pass any further order(s), direction(s) as be deemed just and proper to meet the ends of justice;
2. The brief facts of the case as stated by the applicants are that applicant No. 2 is working on the 3 OA No. 291/278/2019 post of Helper in Kota Division from 12.08.1984. On 26.07.2017, he applied for appointment of applicant No. 1 on the post of Helper under Liberalized Active Retirement Scheme for Guaranteed Employment for Safety Staff (LARSGESS) on completion of 56 years of his service. On 22.08.2017, the applicant's name was considered for appointment according to the list and declaration of Adoption Deed was required from Civil Court by the respondents. Judgment and Decree was pronounced by Civil Court on 04.10.2017 in favour of the applicant and said order was submitted to the respondents on 23.10.2017. On 15.11.2017, the respondents passed the impugned order rejecting appointment but the same was properly received by applicant on 20.01.2018. The applicant filed a representation on 01.12.2017 for giving appointment condoning the delay. Therefore, the applicants have filed the present Original Application for seeking appointment under LARSGESS Scheme of July 2017.
3. The respondents after issue of notices have filed their reply. The respondents have raised the plea of limitation as the applicant have filed the present Original Application challenging the impugned order 4 OA No. 291/278/2019 dated 15.11.2017, which is barred by limitation. No separate application for condonation of delay is filed. The delay in filing the present Original Application cannot be condoned without proper application under Section 21 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985. Therefore, the present Original Application deserves to be dismissed on the ground of delay.
4. On merits, the respondents state that applicant No. 2 is working on the post of Helper/Signal in the pay scale of Rs. 5200-20200/- with Grade Pay of Rs. 1800 in Pay Level-1 Kapren under the SSE/Signal/N/Kota. He was granted Temporary Status w.e.f 12.04.1984 and was regularly appointed w.e.f. 17.05.1988. On 30.06.2017, the respondents had issued a Notification to extend the benefit of LARSGESS to eligible railway employees. Applicant No. 2 submitted his application on 27.07.2017 showing the applicant No. 1 i.e. Shri Raj Kumar Gurjar as his son. He mentioned in the said application that at present applicant No. 1 is studying in Class 10th for Session 2017-18 in Rastriya Mukt Vidhyalayi Shiksha Sansthan, Kota and submitted fee receipt in which father's name was shown as Gauri Shankar Gurjar instead of Bhanwar Lal. As such, his 5 OA No. 291/278/2019 said application was not considered for extending benefit under LARSGESS. The last date of submission of the Application form was 31.07.2017 and it was specifically mentioned at condition No. 7 of the Notification that the eligibility of the employee and his ward will be counted upto cut off date 01.07.2017 and further as condition No. 8 provides the last date of submission of the application form i.e. 31.07.2017. Conditions No. 7 and 8 of the Notification dated 30.06.2017 is as under:-
"07. कमचारी की पा ता 01.07.2017 के आधार पर आं की जायेगी एवं कमचारी के उपयु पु / पु ी की िनयु हे तु भी पा ता 01.07.2017 के आधार पर आं की जाये गी l
8. आवेदन प ुत करने की अंितम ितिथ 31 जुलाई 2017 रहे गी l"
Apart from the above, the checklist submitted along with the application form submitted by the Railway employee i.e. applicant No. 2 clearly mentioned that every requirement of eligibility can be checked upto 01.07.2017 only. It is further clarified that applicant produced a decree dated 04.10.2017 passed by Additional Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate 6 OA No. 291/278/2019 No. 1, (North), Kota, which was issued on 13.10.2017 as proof of declaration that applicant No. 1 is the adopted son of applicant No. 2. Therefore, it is clear that till the last date of submission of application form i.e. upto 31.07.2017, the applicant No. 1 was not legally declared as adopted son of railway employee Shri Bhanwar Lal. As such, he was declared ineligible in the eligibility list issued on 22.08.2017. The applicant deliberately did not submit list of candidates, who applied for the second phase of the scheme. On the other hand, applicant mentioned that his name includes in the selected candidate list, which is not proper. It is further submitted that his name was mentioned in the list of candidates and it was specifically mentioned that he is not eligible since he did not submit valid Adoption Deed which can be perused from Letter dated 22.08.2017 along with list of candidates annexed as Annexure R-2. Moreover, the railway employee Shri Bhanwar Lal, applicant No. 2, has not mentioned in his application dated 27.07.2017 that applicant No. 1 i.e Shri Raj Kumar Gurjar is his adopted son. As such, he has concealed material fact and, therefore, his application deserves to be rejected. It was further stated that the legal notice sent by the 7 OA No. 291/278/2019 applicant dated 01.02.2018 was replied vide letter dated 12.02.2018. Therefore, the action of respondents is just and proper and present Original Application deserves to be dismissed.
5. It is seen that after reply of the respondents, applicant have not filed any rejoinder rebutting the claim of the respondents but has filed an M.A No. 291/186/2020 for taking further documents on record and, accordingly, letter dated 24.01.2020 issued by Chairman, RRC, WCR, Jabalpur, R.B.E. circular No. 150/2018 dated 26.09.2018 issued by the Railway Board and list of ineligible candidates, have been taken on record.
6. Heard learned counsels for the parties through Video Conference and perused material available on record.
7. The controversy in the present matter is pertaining to appointment of applicant No. 1 under LARSGESS Scheme of July 2017. It is the grievance of the applicant No. 2 that he has applied in July under the 8 OA No. 291/278/2019 LARSGESS Scheme and submitted all documents relevant for the said purpose as required. It is seen that applicant No. 2 submitted his application dated 26.07.2017 along with documents but concealed an important fact in his application that applicant No. 1 was a legally adopted son as on the date of submitting his application, he showed that applicant No. 1 was his son but in fact, he was an adopted son. The same can be perused from the fee receipt of the Applicant No. 1 annexed at Annexure R-1. It is clear that the name of father of applicant No. 1 was Gauri Shankar Gurjar and not Bhanwar Lal Gurjar. In fact, the applicants produced a decree dated 04.10.2017 passed by Additional Civil Judge and Magistrate No. 1 (North), Kota which was issued on 13.10.2017 as proof of declaration that applicant No. 1 is the adopted son of the employee Bhanwar Lal Gurjar i.e. applicant No. 2. As seen from the Notification issued by respondents on 30.06.2017 for extending the benefits of LARSGESS to eligible railway employees, it was made clear that last date of submission of the application form was 31.07.2017 and the eligibility of the employee and his ward will be counted upto cut off date 01.07.2017 and condition No. 7 and 8 of the said notification dated 9 OA No. 291/278/2019 30.06.2017 is very clear to that effect, which are as under:
"07. कमचारी की पा ता 01.07.2017 के आधार पर आं की जायेगी एवं कमचारी के उपयु पु / पु ी की िनयु हे तु भी पा ता 01.07.2017 के आधार पर आं की जाये गी l
8. आवेदन प ुत करने की अंितम ितिथ 31 जुलाई 2017 रहे गी l"
Therefore, it is clear that those who apply were required to submit relevant documents along with application form and the same were required to be submitted upto 31.07.2017 and not thereafter. Pertaining to submission of applicant No. 2 that he adopted applicant No. 1 in 2002 cannot be accepted. The said fact proves incorrect from the document annexed to Application Form about Fee Receipt in which father's name is Gauri Shankar Gurjar and not Bhanwar Lal Gurjar and the same is even when Applicant No. 1 is appearing for Class 10th for the Session 2017-18. Also, the name of applicant does not come under eligible list of candidates but on the other hand, his name is seen at serial No. 1 in the list of ineligible candidates as he has not submitted valid 10 OA No. 291/278/2019 adoption deed at the relevant time. Now coming to the letters/circulars annexed by the applicants along with Misc. Application as Annexures A/8, A/9 & A/10, it is clear from letter dated 24.01.2010 issued by Chairman, RRC, WCR/JBP that General Manager has approved to consider the representations and give appointment under LARSGESS Scheme, whose medical examination has been completed prior to 27.10.2017 and found fit, but the employees are yet to retire. In the present case, neither applicant was found eligible nor his medical examination was completed prior to 27.10.2017. None of the conditions stated in the letter dated 24.01.2020 is being fulfilled by the applicants. Pertaining to Railway Board's circular RBE No. 150/2018 dated 26.09.2018, it is clear that Ministry of Railways has decided to terminate the LARSGESS Scheme w.e.f. 27.10.2017 i.e. the date from which it was put on hold. Since Applicants' case now does not fall within the cut off date i.e. 27.10.2017, they cannot be said to be eligible to claim benefit under LARSGESS Scheme. As such, impugned order dated 15.10.2017 passed by respondents is just and proper and cannot be interfered.
11OA No. 291/278/2019
8. In view of the observations made above, the impugned order dated 15.11.2017 is just and proper and, therefore, the present Original Application deserves no merit and the same is, accordingly, dismissed. No order as to costs.
(HINA P. SHAH) (DINESH SHARMA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER Kumawat