Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi

Ashu Malik vs M/O Railways on 6 January, 2023

                           1




       CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
          PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI

                  OA No.4216/2017

         This the 6th day of January, 2023

     HON'BLE MR. ANAND MATHUR, MEMBER (A)
      HON'BLE MS. PRATIMA K. GUPTA, MEMBER(J)

Ashu Malik, S/o Padam Singh
R/o VPO Bahawari, Dist. Shamli
Uttar Pradesh-247776.
                                           ...Applicant

(By Advocate: Mr. Anand Nandan)

                          Vs.

1.   Union of India through Secretary
     Ministry of Railways
     Government of India
     Rail Bhawan, Raisina Road
     New Delhi-110001.

2.   Railway Recruitment Board
     Through its Secretary
     S.C.O. 34, 2nd Floor
     Sector 7-C, Madhya Marg
     Chandigarh-160019.
                                        ...Respondents

(By Advocate: Mr. Sushil Tripathi)
                               2
                                             OA No.4316/2017
Item No.28




                       ORDER(Oral)

Hon'ble Mr. Anand Mathur, Member(A) The present OA has been filed by the applicant seeking the following main reliefs:-

"(i) direct the respondents to clear the name of the applicant and issue the appointment letter for the post of Junior Accounts Assistant cum Typist favouring the applicant in the concerned department of railways;

(ii) direct the respondents to grant all other benefits to the applicant after issuance of appointment letter to the applicant."

2. He states that although vacancies were available but he was not given offer of appointment despite the fact that his name had appeared in the waiting list.

3. Learned counsel for the respondents on the other hand brings to our notice para 19 of the counter affidavit as per which the preferences given by the applicant have been shown as under:-

"19. Option form at the time of 2 nd stage examination (Mains Examination) and indicate his option in order to preference, as below:

Item No.28 Preference No.1 Commercial Apprentice (Cat-

01) Preference No.2 Traffic Apprentice (Cat-02) Preference No.3 Goods Guar (Cat-04) Preference No.4 Junior Accounts Assistant (Cat-

05) Preference No.5 Assistant Station Master (Cat-

07) Preference No.6 Senior Clerk cum Typist (Cat-

06)"

4. From the reply it is clear that the applicant belongs to UR category and that even for the last preference given by him i.e. for Senior Clerk cum Typist his marks are 64.68% which are less than the cut off for UR category i.e. 66.66.%. Therefore, the applicant did not make merit for being selected for any post he had applied for.

5. On hearing both the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, we find that the sole reason for not offering appointment to the applicant is that his marks were less than the marks prescribed for that particular category and the choice of post given by him.

OA No.4316/2017 Item No.28

6. We find no merit in the OA and the same is dismissed. No order as to costs.

( Pratima K. Gupta)                (Anand Mathur)
   Member(J)                         Member(A)

/vb/