Central Administrative Tribunal - Jaipur
Narendra Singh vs M/O Railways on 3 March, 2022
1
OA No. 501/2020 with MA No. 14/2022 & MA No. 96/2021
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR
ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO. 501/2020
with
MISC. APPLICATION NO. 14/2022
&
MISC. APPLICATION NO. 96/2021
Order reserved on 25.02.2022
DATE OF ORDER: 03.03.2022
CORAM
HON'BLE MR. DINESH SHARMA, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER
HON'BLE MRS. HINA P. SHAH, JUDICIAL MEMBER
Narendra Singh Son of Shri Amar Singh aged about 30
years, resident of VPO Jigsana Tal, Tehsil Taranagar,
District Churu, Rajasthan, Pin code 331304 Mobile no.
9829989510 (applied for the Group D in pursuance to
the CEN no. 02/2018 dated 10.02.2018).
....Applicant
Shri Iliyas Khan, counsel for applicant (through Video
Conferencing).
VERSUS
1. Union of India through the General Manager
North Western Railway, Headquarter, Jawahar
Circle, Jagatpura Road, Jaipur-302017.
2. Chairman, Railway Recruitment Board Ajmer,
2010, Nehru Marg, Ambedkar Circle, Ajmer-
305028 (Raj.).
3. President, Railway Recruitment Cell, Jaipur,
North Western Railway, Opposite DRM Office,
Power House Road, Jaipur-302006.
4. Assistant Personnel Officer (recruitment) Railway
Recruitment Cell, North Western Railway,
Opposite DRM Office, Power House Road, Jaipur-
302006.
.... Respondents
Shri S.K. Saini, counsel for respondent nos. 1, 3 & 4
(through Video Conferencing).
Shri Anupam Agarwal, counsel for respondent no. 2
(through Video Conferencing).
2
OA No. 501/2020 with MA No. 14/2022 & MA No. 96/2021
ORDER
Per: Hina P. Shah, Judicial Member The present Original Application has been filed by the applicant under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 for the following reliefs:-
"(i) Respondents may kindly be directed to consider the candidature of the applicant for documents verification in pursuance of the reserve list/waiting list (Annexure-A/4) and include his name in further selection procedure i.e. medical etc. and give him appointment on the post of Group D from the date junior to him has been given, with all consequential benefits.
(ii) That the action of the respondents in not sending the information of date, time and venue of documents verification in compliance of the waiting list/reserved list (Annexure-
A/4) issued in pursuance to CEN no.
02/2018 dated 10.02.2018 may kindly be held as arbitrary, unreasonable, illegal and same may kindly be quashed and set aside.
(iii) Or in alternate respondents may kindly be directed to decide the representation of the application by speaking and reasoned order within a stipulated time period.
(iv) Any other order or direction which this tribunal deems appropriate may kindly be passed in favour of the applicant."
2. The brief facts of the case, as stated by the applicant, are that the respondents / Government of 3 OA No. 501/2020 with MA No. 14/2022 & MA No. 96/2021 India, Ministry of Railways, Railway Recruitment Boards, had issued a Centralised Employment Notice No. 02/2018 dated 10.02.2018 for filling up various posts in Level 1 of 7th CPC Pay Matrix and the applicant had applied online application for the said post (Group 'D') as he fulfilled all the requisites for the said appointment. He was called for Computer Based Test (CBT) by issuing E-Call letter. After being successful in the CBT, he was called for Physical Efficiency Test (PET). The respondents issued main merit list but name of the applicant could not find place. When selected candidates did not join, respondents issued a waiting/reserved list and called the candidates for documents verification. In the said list, name of the applicant stands at Sl. no. 6 (Annexure A/4). The applicant did not get any information neither on his registered mobile number nor on his email about time and place for documents verification. It is the case of the applicant that at the time of filling online application form, he has given email address of owner/worker of E-Mitra as he was not having any email ID as he was using basic mobile number. Applicant belongs to rural area and does not frequently use email ID and, therefore, he was unaware about the date and venue for documents 4 OA No. 501/2020 with MA No. 14/2022 & MA No. 96/2021 verification, which may not be considered as detrimental to the interest of the applicant. Only from his colleagues when he became aware about documents verification, he contacted the respondents, but they stated that he was informed through email. Then he represented to respondents to consider his candidature, but no heed was paid to the same. Selection process is not completed and candidates, who were called for documents verification have been called for their medial and thereafter select list shall be issued, therefore, if he is allowed for verification of documents then no third party right will be effected nor selection process will be effected. Thus, a sympathetic view be taken due to COVID-19 epidemic. Therefore, being aggrieved by the action of respondents, applicant has approached this Tribunal for redressal of his grievance.
3 (a). After issue of notices, the respondent no. 2 has filed reply stating that the answering respondent has no role in conduct of documents verification. Applicant has applied in pursuance to CEN No. 02/2018 for recruitment of various posts in Level-1 for vacancies in Railways and applications were invited on-line from eligible candidates. Applicant was thereafter issued a call letter to appear in on-line Computer Based Test 5 OA No. 501/2020 with MA No. 14/2022 & MA No. 96/2021 (CBT). Based on the marks obtained in CBT, he was selected for Physical Efficiency Test (PET). In the result of CBT, all shortlisted candidates for PET were informed that Ministry of Railways decided that the conduct of PET, documents verification, medical examination and publishing panel for Level-1 posts shall be carried out by Railway Recruitment Cell. The answering respondent has no role to play as respondent nos. 3 and 4 have already been impleaded. Thus, respondent no. 2 prays that he may be deleted from the array of respondents as he is not necessary party and he has no role in the reliefs sought for by the applicant.
(b) The respondent Nos. 1, 3 & 4 stated that the applicant was called for documents verification through e-call letter due to non appearance of eligible candidates in the 1st cut off list. The second list was uploaded on the official website of RRC wherein it was specifically mentioned that the proceeding to be conducted for documents verification of eligible candidates would be starting from 27.01.2020 to 11.02.2020 in the RRC at Jaipur and all eligible candidates also informed that the e-mail letter were uploaded on the official website and information also given by SMS on his mobile No. 9001902517 and E- 6 OA No. 501/2020 with MA No. 14/2022 & MA No. 96/2021 mail sent on his email-ID [email protected] which was mentioned in his application form by himself. It is further mentioned that the mobile number given by the applicant in his application form by himself is 9001902517 which is totally different from the mobile number mentioned in the O.A. and, thus, cooking a story that he belongs to rural area or that his bright future will be crashed cannot be accepted. The respondents further state that the same process was also adopted at earlier time at the time of written examination and for physical test of all eligible candidates. It is pertinent to mention that vide letter dated 07.02.2020 also one more chance was given to all eligible candidates who could not appear in the recruitment cell for their documents verification who were found eligible in second list of cut-off marks and this information was published through the official website of the RRC that those candidates who were absent at that time they could appear on 12.02.2020 for their documents verification. But despite the last opportunity granted to the applicant, he did not appear for documents verification before the competent authority. Due to the reason that the applicant failed on his own part and so he lost chance of verification of documents and he himself is to be 7 OA No. 501/2020 with MA No. 14/2022 & MA No. 96/2021 blamed for it. It is pertinent to mention that respondents have complied all the conditions mentioned in the CEN no. 02/2018 as all information pertaining to the said recruitment were sent on the mobile number as well as E-mail mentioned in his application form by himself. It is also stated that with regard to CBT as well as PET, information was sent on the same mobile number as well as the same email ID given in his online application form and applicant attended the same. Respondents further stated that after completion of recruitment process, now it is not possible to verify documents of the applicant as it is obstacle/hurdle as per rules of recruitment. Therefore, there is no requirement of any interference of this Tribunal in the present O.A. and, thus, the same is liable to be rejected. In their support, the respondents have relied on the following judgments/orders:
a) Hon'ble Apex Court judgement in the case of Bedanga Talukdar vs. Saifudaullah Khan & Ors., reported in (2011) 12 SCC 85.
b) Hon'ble Apex Court judgement in the case of Union of India & Anr. vs. Sarwan Ram & Anr.
[SLP (Civil) No. 706/2014] dated 08.10.2014.
4. The applicant has filed a rejoinder denying the submissions of the respondents. The applicant further stated that as he belongs to rural area, he is not 8 OA No. 501/2020 with MA No. 14/2022 & MA No. 96/2021 familiar with the email ID and, therefore, he could not know about the date and venue of the documents verification of the candidates who found place in second list, conducted by the respondents. Also the contact number mentioned in online application form does not belong to the applicant. Since it is a petty mistake, the same should be ignored and he should be called for documents verification as the same can be conducted for a single candidate and there is no obstacle/hurdle in verification of documents of the applicant. In support of his arguments, the applicant relied upon the judgment passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Rajasthan, Jaipur Bench in the case of Brijesh Kumari vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (SBCWP No. 18992/2017) decided on 08.11.2017, wherein the Hon'ble High Court has disposed of the writ petitions by giving directions to concerned Zilla Parishad to provide one more opportunity to the petitioners in those Writ Petitions for their documents verification. Accordingly, relying on the said judgment, the applicant states that in the light of the said judgment, he too deserves an additional chance for documents verification. Thus, as the action of the respondents is arbitrary and illegal, present O.A. deserves to be allowed.
9OA No. 501/2020 with MA No. 14/2022 & MA No. 96/2021
5. We have heard learned counsels for the parties at length through Video Conferencing and examined the pleadings minutely as well as the judgments/orders cited by the parties.
6. The applicant and respondents have reiterated their stand as taken earlier.
7. As far as MA No. 14/2022 is concerned, the same has been filed by the applicant praying for taking Notice for documents verification dated 07.01.2022 on record. The said Notice dated 07.01.2022, annexed with the M.A., is taken on record. Accordingly, said M.A. is disposed of.
8. As far as M.A. No. 96/2021 is concerned, the same has been filed by the applicant praying for keeping one post under OBC category vacant for the applicant pursuant to CEN No. 02/2018 dated 10.02.2018 and also provisional panel (Part-V CEN 02/2018) dated 13.01.2021 be taken on record. Since the Original Application itself is being decided finally by this order, therefore, we are of the view that there is no necessity of considering the prayer for interim relief at this stage. However, in the interest of justice, provisional panel (Part-V CEN No. 02/2018) dated 10 OA No. 501/2020 with MA No. 14/2022 & MA No. 96/2021 13.01.2021, annexed with the M.A., is taken on record. Accordingly, the said M.A. is disposed of to the extent indicated above.
9. The question which requires to be considered is whether the candidature of the applicant ought to have been cancelled on the ground of not following the instructions as given in the notification and when there is no interim protection and third party rights are effected.
10. After hearing the parties and perusing the pleadings, the factual matrix of the case is that the applicant, after fulfilling the criteria as required, had applied for the post in Level-1 (Group 'D' post) for the vacancies in various units of Indian Railways in pursuance to the Central Employment Notice No. 02/2018 dated 10.02.2018. He was given a call letter and had appeared in the Computer Based Test. He was successful in CBT as well as PET. The respondents issued main merit list, in which his name could not find place. It is stated by the applicant that when the selected candidates did not join then respondents issued a waiting list / reserved list and called the candidates for documents verification on 05.02.2020. In the said waiting list / reserved list, name of the 11 OA No. 501/2020 with MA No. 14/2022 & MA No. 96/2021 applicant finds place at Sl. No. 6. It is the contention of the applicant that he was not called for documents verification. He did not get any information neither on his registered mobile number nor on his email ID about date, time and place for documents verification. It is the case of the applicant that at the time of filling online application form, he has given email address of owner/worker of E-Mitra as he was not having any email ID as he was using basic mobile phone. It is further contention of the applicant that he belongs to rural area and does not frequently use email and, therefore, he was unaware about the date, time and venue for documents verification. He further states that as he is not familiar with the email ID and, therefore, he could not know about the date, time and venue of the documents verification of the candidates who found place in second list, conducted by the respondents. With regard to his mobile number, applicant states that the contact number mentioned in online application form does not belong to him.
11. On the other hand, we have seen that the respondents had uploaded the second list on the official website of the RRC wherein it was specifically mentioned that the proceeding to be conducted for documents verification of eligible candidates would be 12 OA No. 501/2020 with MA No. 14/2022 & MA No. 96/2021 starting from 27.01.2020 to 11.02.2020 in the RRC at Jaipur and all eligible candidates were also informed that the e-mail letter were uploaded on the official website and information also given by SMS to the applicant on his mobile No. 9001902517 and E-mail sent on his email-ID [email protected] which was mentioned in his application form by himself. We have also noted that the same process was also adopted by the respondents earlier at the time of written examination and for physical test of all eligible candidates. It is seen that vide letter dated 07.02.2020, respondents also gave one more chance to all eligible candidates who could not appear in the recruitment cell for their documents verification who were found eligible in second list of cut-off marks and this information was published through the official website of RRC that those candidates who were absent at that time they, could appear on 12.02.2020 for their documents verification. But despite the last opportunity granted to the applicant, he did not appear for documents verification before the competent authority.
12. As per para 15 of the said CEN No. 02/2018, candidates were advised to visit website of RRB frequently to get the latest information on various 13 OA No. 501/2020 with MA No. 14/2022 & MA No. 96/2021 stages of recruitment process or any changes about this Notification. They were also advised to keep their personal mobile number and personal valid e-mail active throughout the recruitment process as all communication from RRBs were through SMS/e-mail. We have noticed that the respondents have already given two chances to the applicant for documents verification. They have already informed about the same on his e-mail ID as well as his registered mobile number as mentioned in his application form. Even vide letter dated 07.02.2020 one more chance was given to all eligible candidates who could not appear in the recruitment cell for their documents verification who were found eligible in second list of cut-off marks and this information was published through the official website of the RRC that those candidates who were absent at that time, they could appear on 12.02.2020 for their documents verification.
13. It is seen that the respondents have given enough opportunities to the applicant to come for documents verification. They have sent letter/information in this regard on the e-mail ID mentioned by the applicant in his application form as [email protected]. He was also sent message/information on the registered mobile number 9001902517 as mentioned 14 OA No. 501/2020 with MA No. 14/2022 & MA No. 96/2021 by applicant himself in his application form by SMS about the date, time and venue of the documents verification. The respondents are not expected to go on giving several chances till the candidate finally appears. We also are of the view that selection is to be conducted as per the procedure laid down for the purpose. It cannot be stretched / extended indefinitely as the same cannot be conducted at any time as per the whims and fancies of the candidates because selection has to be conducted in a time bound manner. Also no right accrues to the applicant as he himself is to be blamed as he himself has failed to keep a track on his given mobile number as well as given E-mail ID in his application form as per the conditions of the Notification. He cannot be careless and casual and then submit that it is a petty mistake and he should be given an additional chance for documents verification.
14. We do not find any substance in any of the grounds raised by the applicant as the same are not sustainable in the eyes of law. The applicant himself has admitted that at the time of filling online application form, he has given e-mail address of owner/worker of E-Mitra as he was not having any e- mail ID as he was using basic mobile phone. Applicant 15 OA No. 501/2020 with MA No. 14/2022 & MA No. 96/2021 belongs to rural area and does not frequently use e- mail and, therefore, he was unaware about the date, time and venue for documents verification cannot be accepted as he has failed to follow the instructions mentioned in the Notification for which he is himself responsible. Thus, the action of the respondents cannot be said to be arbitrary, illegal or in violation of any fundamental rules.
15. We do not agree with the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Rajasthan, Jaipur Bench passed in the case of Brijesh Kumari (supra), relied upon by the applicant, as in present case already more than one chance have been given to the applicant to come for documents verification. In the said case cited by the applicant, it is seen that only one chance was given to the petitioner, therefore, the Hon'ble Court directed to the concerned that second chance/one more chance be given to her for documents verification. On the other hand, coming to the judgments relied upon by the respondents, it has been clearly observed in Hon'ble Apex Court's judgment in the case of Sarwan Ram (supra) that in non-compliance of the conditions mentioned in notice, it was always open to the competent authority to reject such an application being incomplete as the conditions were mandatory. 16 OA No. 501/2020 with MA No. 14/2022 & MA No. 96/2021 We have also found from the pleadings that the selection process has already been completed. Also no interim protection is granted in his favour, therefore, third party rights are bound to be effected. Therefore, we cannot interfere in the selection process, which has already been completed.
16. Thus, in view of the observations made herein- above, the action of the respondents cannot be interfered with by this Tribunal as the same is just and proper and, therefore, the Original Application being devoid of any merits deserves to be dismissed. Accordingly, present Original Application is dismissed. No order as to costs.
(HINA P. SHAH) (DINESH SHARMA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER /nlk/