Central Administrative Tribunal - Allahabad
Jai Prakash Prasad vs Union Of India on 4 July, 2025
OA No. 1325 of 2011
(Reserved on 02.07.2025)
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
ALLAHABAD BENCH
ALLAHABAD.
Allahabad, this the 04th day of July, 2025.
Original Application No. 330/01325/2011
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Om Prakash VII, Member (Judicial)
Hon'ble Mr. Mohan Pyare, Member (Administrative)
Jay Prakash Prasad S/o Indra Devram, Presently posted at T.S. / Khalasi/
Railway Electrification, Kolkata (R/o Village and Post Office Amhar Patti
Uttar, District Balia).
.......Applicant.
By Advocate : Shri Santosh Kumar Kushwaha
VERSUS
1. Union of India through the General Manager, North Central Railway,
Hqrs. Office Subedarganj, Prayagraj.
2. General Manager (Karmik) Core, Central Organisation Railway
Electrification, Nawab Yusuf Road, Civil Lines, Allahabad 211001.
3. Sr. Personnel Officer, Railway Electrification, Kolkata.
4. General Manager, North Central Railway, Hqrs. Office Subedarganj,
Prayagraj.
5. Divisional Railway Manager, North Central Railway, DRM's Office,
Prayagraj Division, Prayagraj.
6. Divisional Railway Manager, Central Railway, Nagpur.
....Respondents
By Advocate: Shri K.K. Ojha
ORDER
By Hon'ble Mr. Mohan Pyare, Member (Administrative):
Shri Santosh Kumar Kushwaha, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri K.K. Ojha, learned counsel for the respondents are present.
2. By means of this OA, the applicant has sought the following reliefs :
"(i) To issue a suitable direction to the respondent no. 1 to get the lien of the applicant decided in any Railway Division.Page 1 of 4
RAJEEV KUMAR MISHRA OA No. 1325 of 2011
(ii) To issue a suitable direction to the respondent no. 1 to get the services of the applicant regularized at the earliest.
(iii) Issue any suitable writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Tribunal deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case."
3. The brief facts of the case are that the applicant and Girja Shankar Srivastava were engaged as casual Khalasi on 20.10.88 in the Railway Electrification, Project Nagpur. After continuous service of 260 days as casual Khalasi, the applicant and Girja Shankar Srivastava were granted temporary status of Khalasi. In 1992, both were transferred to the Ranchi Electrification Project, where they were involved in a D.A.R. case that was dismissed by the respondent on 30.03.1998. Thus, the applicant has been regularly serving in the Railway Electrification but his lien to a particular division has not been decided till date whereas the lien of Girja Shankar Srivastava to the Jhansi Division of the Railways was decided on 13.11.2006 after his screening test. The applicant has faced financial losses due to the lack of regularization and has made multiple representations to fix his lien and regularize his service. In this regard, the last representation was submitted by the applicant on 02.12.2010. Hence, this OA.
4. The respondents have strongly refuted the contention of applicant by filing counter affidavit in which they have admitted that the applicant was appointed as Casual Khalasi on 20.10.1988 in Railway Electrification, Nagpur and was granted temporary status in the year1989. Subsequently, the applicant was transferred to Ranchi on 27.07.1992. The Railway Electrification is temporary organization, therefore the lien of the employee is to be maintained by the parent Railway and in the present case, the lien of the applicant will be fixed by DRM (P)/ CR/NGP of Central Railway Nagpur, after screening test. Another employee, Shri Girja Shanker Srivastava, who was also working in Ranchi Electrification project along with the applicant Page 2 of 4 RAJEEV KUMAR MISHRA OA No. 1325 of 2011 and his lien was decided on 13.11.2006 by Jhansi Division. It is submitted that the applicant belongs to Nagpur Division, therefore, screening test will be conducted by the Nagpur Division and thereafter the services of the applicant will be regularized. On 21.01.2008, the respondent no. 3 has sent the service record of the applicant to Nagpur Division for the screening and regularization but the same is still pending. It is submitted that the lien of the applicant has to be fixed by DRM/(P)/CR/Nagpur because the applicant was appointed in RE/Nagpur. Therefore, for regularization of the Services of the applicant it should be approached before the DRM/ (P)/CR/NGP. On the basis of above discussions, learned counsel for the respondents has requested to dismiss the OA.
5. In rejoinder affidavit, the applicant has reiterated the same facts as given in the OA.
6. Considered the rival submissions and verified the documents available on record.
7. After careful consideration of the submissions made by both the parties, it is admitted fact that the applicant was appointed as a Casual Khalasi on 20.10.1988 in the Railway Electrification (RE), Nagpur, and was granted temporary status in 1989. Subsequently, he was transferred to the Ranchi Electrification Project, where he continued to serve without a formal decision on the fixation of his lien. Despite several representations made by the applicant between 2007 and 2010, no final decision has been taken regarding his lien or regularization. It is also observed that another similarly placed employee, Shri Girja Shankar Srivastava who was also appointed on the same date had his lien determined by the Jhansi Division in 2006 after a screening test. The respondents submitted that the applicant's case is Page 3 of 4 RAJEEV KUMAR MISHRA OA No. 1325 of 2011 pending with the DRM/P/CR/NGP of Nagpur Division. They further submitted that as the applicant was appointed under the Railway Electrification in Nagpur, the Nagpur Division is responsible for determining his lien. FA & CAO/Admin/Core, Allahabad in his letter dated 17.10.2014 has addressed to Sr. Personnel Officer, Railway Electrification Kolkata for fixation of lien of the applicant. Sr. Assistant Financial Advisor RE Kolkata has sent service particulars of the applicant to FA & CAO/Core, Allahabad in his letter dated 03.08.2016. There was further communication from Sr. Assistant Financial Advisor RE Kolkata in letter dated 18.09.2017 and 10.12.2020, it clearly establishes that lien of the applicant could not be fixed due to lapses on the part of respondents. The OA is liable to be allowed and is accordingly allowed. The respondents are hereby directed to expedite the screening process of the applicant's service and take necessary action to determine the applicant's lien within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The respondents must take necessary actions to regularize the services of the applicant from the date from which his co- worker, who was posted along with the applicant and provide the consequential benefits. No order as to costs.
8. All MAs pending in this O.A. also stand disposed off.
(Mohan Pyare) (Justice Om Prakash VII)
Member(Administrative) Member(Judicial)
RKM/
Page 4 of 4
RAJEEV KUMAR MISHRA