Central Administrative Tribunal - Jabalpur
Rajendra Kumar Kaushik vs M/O Railways on 9 January, 2026
1
Reserved
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
JABALPUR BENCH
(Circuit Sitting at Bilaspur)
Original Application No.791 of 2018
Bilaspur, this Friday, the 9th day of January, 2025
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AKHIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE SMT. MALLIKA ARYA, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER
1. RAJENDRA KUMAR KAUSHIK, S/o Shri. DayaramKaushik, Aged about 37
Years, Track Maintainer-4 R/o Narmada Vihar, Yadunandan Nagar Tifra,
BILASPUR-495001 (CG)
2. SANJAY KUMAR GUPTA, S/o Shri Indra Prasad Gupta, Aged about 43 Years,
Track Maintainer-4 R/o Rajbhawan, Jabda Prara, New Sarkanda, BILASPUR-
495001
3. Smt. SHARDA ROY, W/o Shri Partho Roy, Aged about 35 Yrs., Female Track
Maintainer-4, R/o R.N.T. Lane, Hemu Nagar, BILASPUR-495001 (CG)
4. ARVIND KUMAR SHRIVASTAV, S/o Shri Bhawani BheekhLal, Aged about 41
years, Track Maintainer-4 R/o 38/644, Hemu Nagar, BILASPUR (CG)
5. SHUBHAM, S/o Shri Ramesh Kumar Upadhyay Aged about 28 Years, Track
Maintainer-4, R/o DevriKhurd, BILASPUR-495001 (CG)
6. SATYA NARAYAN NIRMALKAR, S/o Titaram Nirmalkar, Aged about 40
Years, Track Maintainer-4, R/o Nagar Panchayat Nigam, Tifra, BILASPUR-
495001 (CG)
7. SAURABH KUMAR PANDEY, S/o Shri Hanuman Din Pandey, Aged about 38
Years, Track Maintainer-4, BILASPUR-495001 (CG)
8. DEVENDRA SONI, S/o Shri Thaleshwar Prasad Soni, Aged about 33 Years,
Track Maintainer-4, R/o Krishna Nagar, Devrikhurd, BILASPUR-495001 (CG)
9. RAVINDRA KUMAR KHANDEY, S/o Shri Bhauram Khandey, Aged about 29
Years, Track Maintainer-4, R/o Village Pendari Kanan, PO-SAKRI. District-
Bilaspur (CG)
10. BINAY KETAN DAS, S/o Shri.S.K.Das, Aged about Years, Track Maintainer-4
R/o Kasim Para, Shome Gali, BILASPUR-495001 (CG)
11. ABHAY KUMAR, S/o Shri Ramauatar Bind, Aged about 28 Years, Track
Maintainer-4 R/o Om Printers, Urga Chowk, Urga, KORBA-495674 (CG)
VISHAL 2026.01.12
KUSHWAH 11:46:26+05'30'
2
Reserved
12. JYOT KUMAR SURYAWANSHI, S/o Shri. Ramulal Suryawanshi, Aged about
34 Years, Track Maintainer-4 R/o Vill-Kanhaiband, PO SIVNI (Naila) Dist.
Janjgir Champa (CG) 495668
13. VISHNUPATI YADAV, S/o Shri Govind Prasad Yadav, Aged about 29 Years,
Track Maintainer-4 R/o Railway Colony, Urga, KORBA-495674 (CG)
14. CHANDAN KUMAR, S/o Shri Bashudev Singh, Aged about 28 Years, Track
Maintainer-4 R/o Om Printers, Urga Chowk, Urga, KORBA-495674 (CG)
15. DEEPAK KUMAR, S/o Shri Ramgee Yadav, Aged about 28 Years, Track
Maintainer-4 R/o Urga Ward No. 2, House No. 35/3 KORBA-495674 (CG)
16. ARVIND KUSHWAHA, S/o Shri Kamta Kushwaha, Aged about 28 Years, Track
Maintainer-4, R/o Vill-BARACHAWAR, Dist. Gazipur (UP)
17. MANTU KUMAR, S/o Shri Prabhunath Singh, Aged about 26 Years, Track
Maintainer-4 R/o Vill-Manchitwa, Po-Mastichak Dist. Saran (Bihar) 841219
18. GHANSHYAM KARSH, S/o Shri AmritLal Karsh Aged about 32 Years, Track
Maintainer-4 R/o Vill& Post-ODEKARA, Dist. Janjgir-Champa (CG) 495690
19. SAT KUMAR, S/o ShriLala, Aged about 29 Years, Track Maintainer-4, R/o Vill-
Pendri, Post-SARGAON, Dist. Mungeli-495224 (CG)
20. PUSHKAR KUMAR, S/o Shri Badri Nath Mishra, Aged about 29 Years, Track
Maintainer-4 R/o Pachar, Po. SARAWAK Via Rafiganj Dist- Aurangabad (Bihar)
824125
21. NARENDRA DHOBI, S/o Shri Manilal Dhobi Aged about 31 Years, Track
Maintainer-4, R/o Vill-GOBARA, Post-Chutela, Dist- Janjgir-Champa (CG)
495668
22. THANU RAM SHRIVAS, S/o Shri Shyam Lal, Aged about 33 Years, Track
Maintainer-4 R/o Mahamaya Ward, Sonar Para, MUNGELI-495334 (CG)
23. AKESH KUMAR, S/o Shri Shkandra Prasad Sharma Aged about 34 Years, Track
Maintainer-4 R/o Village - BISHAY, PO-Manikpur. Dist. Munger (Bihar)
24. SANDIP KUMAR, S/o Shri Anju Ram Yadav, Aged about 37 Years, Track
Maintainer-4, R/o Qr. No. 25/2 Railway Colony, USLAPUR Dist Bilaspur (CG)
495001
25. RAJESH KUMARM, S/o Shri Gopi Prasad, Aged about 27 Years, Track
Maintainer-4 R/o Vill MANPUR PO-Sandh Dist-Nawada (Bihar) 805127
26. AMRESH KUMAR, S/o Maru, Aged about 24 Years, Track Maintainer-4 R/o Vill.
KACHAHARI PUR Po- Banar Jhula Dist. Sitamarhi (Bihar)
VISHAL 2026.01.12
KUSHWAH 11:46:26+05'30'
3
Reserved
27. HANISH SUNA, S/o Late Lalu Suna, R/o Q.No. 15/2, Railway Colony, Aged
about 30 Years, Track Maintainer-4 CHANDIA Dist Umaria (MP)
28. AJAY KUMAR, S/o Shri RamchandraYadav, Aged about 26 Years, Track
Maintainer-4 R/o Vill-MANJHAULI PS-Tankuppa Dist. Gaya (Bihar)
29. RAM KISHORE, S/o Shri Jagdish Prasad, Aged about 26 Years, Track
Maintainer-4, R/o PUREBABA BANSHI RIHAYAK, Post-Kurauli Budhkar
Dist. Raebareli (UP)
30. SRIKANT SINGH, S/o Shri Suresh Chandra Singh Aged about 35 Years, Track
Maintainer-4 R/o Vill-RUPCHAKIYA, Post-Khangaon Dist-BhojpurAara (Bihar).
31. JANAK LAL, S/o Shri Chainu Ram, Aged about 33 Years, Track Maintainer-4 |
R/o Ward No. 5, DALLI RAJAHARA Dist. Balod (CG)
-Applicants
Advocate for the: Shri Shayon Kar
Versus
1. Union of India through theGeneral Manager,S.E.C. Railway,
Bilaspur Zone, Headquarters' Office, Bilaspur - 495004 (CG)
2. The Secretary, Railway Board, Ministry of Railways, Rail
Bhawan, Raisina Road, New Delhi - 110001.
3. The Sr. Divisional Personnel Officer, S.E.C. Railway, Bilaspur
division, DRM's Office, Bilaspur - 495004 (CG)
-Respondents
Advocate for the respondents: Shri Siddarth Rathod
VISHAL 2026.01.12
KUSHWAH 11:46:26+05'30'
4
Reserved
ORDER
By MallikaArya, Member (A)-
By means of the instant Original Application filed under section 19 of Administrative Tribunals Act 1985, the applicants has prayed for the following reliefs:-
8.2 That the Hon'ble Tribunal be pleased to declare Paras 122, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 130, 143, 146A, 147, 148 & 150 of IREM Volumn-I (1989 Edition) i.e., (Annexure A-4 to Annexure A-15) are ultra-vires, discriminatory in nature, unconstitutional and against article 14 of the Constitution of India, thus quashed on being not including the Trackmaintainers of Engineering Department, as one of feeder post for promotion under LDCE Quota for the post of Goods Guard, Station Master, Traffic Apprentice, Trains Clerk, Ticket Collectors, Commercial Clerks, Commercial Apprentice3s, Permanent Way Mistry, JE-II™ Signal Inspectors, Telecom Inspectors and Skilled Artisans etc. 8.3 That, the Hon'ble Tribunal be pleased to pass an Order/Direction to the Respondents to allow the Applicants to participate in the forthcoming selection for promotion under LDCE quota to the posts of Goods Guard, Station Master, Traffic Apprentice, Trains Clerk, Ticket Collectors, Commercial Clerks, Commercial Apprentices, Permanent Way Mistry, JE-II™, Signal Inspectors, Telecom Inspectors and Skilled Artisans etc.
2. The facts of the case, in brief, are that the applicants, whoare working as Track Maintainer with medical classifications of A-2, A-3 and B-1in the pay scale of Rs. 5200-20200 with Grade Pay 1800/- in the VISHAL 2026.01.12 KUSHWAH 11:46:26+05'30' 5 Reserved Engineering Department, have been excluded from the list of feeder categories for promotion to Group-C posts under the Limited Departmental Competitive Examination (LDCE) despite the fact that the Track Maintainers possess educational qualifications and medical standards equal to or higher than those of Group-D employees in the Commercial and Operating Departments. The grievance of the applicants is that the said promotional avenues have been arbitrarily confined to the employees of the Operating and Commercial Departments. It is further submitted that the duties performed by Track Maintainers are vital to the safety and operational efficiency of the Railways, and their posts demand a higher medical classification and technical competence than many other Group-D positions. Thus, the exclusion of Track Maintainers from the LDCE scheme, despite they being recruited under the same process and share a common grade, pay, and service channel with other Group-D employees, is manifestly arbitrary, discriminatory and contrary to the settled principles of equality and fair opportunity in public employment.
3. The applicants has stated that if non-safety employees can transition to a higher safety-sensitive role, there is no justification in excluding Trackmen who are already familiar with railway safety protocols. Promotions to Goods Guard (Safety Category) and TT (Ticket Collector, Non-Safety Category) are open to employees from Operating VISHAL 2026.01.12 KUSHWAH 11:46:26+05'30' 6 Reserved and Commercial departments, but Engineering Department's Trackmen are systematically excluded. Referring to various promotion charts, relevant extracts, provisions of the Indian Railway Establishment Manual (IREM), and pertinent circulars and communications issued by the Railway Board in the Original Application (Annexure A-3), the applicant has stated that while the employees in other Group-D categories have been duly recognized as feeder cadres for promotion to Group-C posts under 15% LDCE quota, the Track Maintainers have been unjustly and inexplicably excluded, notwithstanding their equivalent pay scale, educational qualifications, and medical standards. Thus, the applicants have contended that Para 122, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 130, 143, 146A, 147, 148 & 150 of IREM Vol. I (1989) for LDCE feeder posts may be declared ultra vires, discriminatory and against Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
4. The respondents have contested the OA and filed the reply stating therein that the Ministry of Railways has made rules for promotion according to seniority which is separately maintained unit wise and department wise. The respondents have contended that the applicants are not aggrieved with any particular order but they are aggrieved regarding non-inclusion in IREM Volume-I and that these Paras in IREM should be declared ultra-vires and discriminatory in VISHAL 2026.01.12 KUSHWAH 11:46:26+05'30' 7 Reserved nature. They are contending that the Trackman should be allowed to compete under the LDCE quota for promotion to the post of goods Guard, Station Master, Traffic Apprentice, Trains Clerk, Ticket Collectors, Commercial Clerks, Commercial Apprentice etc. The Track Maintainers in the Engineering Department in the Railways are selected through the Railway Recruitment Cell under common recruitment process but they are posted in Different units/categories/departments on the basis of available vacancies, medical standards and on merits. Once the applicants got posted in their respective departments, then for further promotions, the seniority is maintained merit wise/ department wise separately. For group 'D' staff who were selected as Track maintainer their avenues of promotion in the higher grade is TM -III, II and I in Grade Pay 1900/-, 2400/-, 2800/- and they are eligible for promotion to the post of JE (P.Way) against 20% LDCE quota with prescribed educational qualification. The group 'D' staff who were selected as Porter Helper in the Commercial and Traffic Department have another avenue of promotion and they are eligible for promotion to the post of guard TTE, TC, CC, TNC against 15% LDCE quota. They are not allowed to appear in the JE (P.Way) exam against LDCE quota which is reserved for trackman in the Engineering Department Hence, on the VISHAL 2026.01.12 KUSHWAH 11:46:26+05'30' 8 Reserved basis of the common recruitment test, it cannot be claimed that promotional avenues of different categories should be open to all recruits. The Ministry of Railways has from time to time amended the criteria and percentage of quota in the promotional posts such as GDCE quota for filling 25% direct recruitment quota in Group 'C' categories which is open for all group 'D' staffs. As per establishment serial No. 89/2017 which is issued in pursuance of RBE No. 46/2017 concerns were raised in filling the post of Goods Guard by some zonal railways as well as by the federations. Hence, the Railway Board decided to add some additional categories in the feeder list for promotion to Goods Guards in different quota. The mode of filling up the post of Goods Guard is as under:-
1) 60% by General Selection from amongst serving regular employees of commercial and operating department with minimum thrée year service.
2) 15% of LDCE + Short fall if any against one above from amongst serving regular employees of commercial and operating department with minimum three year service
3) 25% Direct recruitments through RRB with graduate qualification.
VISHAL 2026.01.12 KUSHWAH 11:46:26+05'30' 9 Reserved 4 Short fall in general selection as per (1) above to be added to LDCE and short fall in LDCE transferred to GDCE quota open for all department.
The prayer of the applicants to allow them to appear in forthcoming selection through the LDCE quota to the post of Goods Guard, Station Master etc. is not tenable because LDCE is a Limited Department Examination which is available to the staff of concerned category. Hence the OA merits to be dismissed.
5. It has been further submitted that the post of Station Master, Guard, Traffic Apprentice Train clerk is to be filled up as per Para 122,124,125,126 of IREM. The post of Ticket collectors, Commercial Clerk, Commercial Apprentice is to be filled up as per Para 127,128 & 130 and Estt. Rule No.78/98, 208/200, 46/03, 72/17, 210/18. Hence the track maintainer category does not fall within the purview of above mentioned posts against LDCE quota. It has further been stated that as per Para 124 of IREM Vol-I and BSP Rule No.89/2017, only commercial staff in the operating department having GP-1900, 2000, 2400 respectively are eligible for promotion/selection to the post of Goods Guard against 15% LDCE quota. The joint representation of applicants received on 10.07.2018 has already been replied vide Sr.DPO letter dated 13.07.2018 (Annexure A/21). VISHAL 2026.01.12 KUSHWAH 11:46:26+05'30' 10 Reserved
06. The applicants have filed rejoinder wherein they have submitted that Track Maintainers are allowed to appear in the GDCE quota. However, they are not permitted to appear in the LDCE quota at par with the other employees of the Group 'D' category. However, the commercial and operating staffs are allowed to appear both in the GDCE and LDCE quota. Hence, there is discrimination with the cadre of Track Maintainers by the respondents.
07. We have heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the documents.
08. We find that the applicants are not challenging any particular order issued by the respondents but are challenging the policy of the respondents. The applicant is making multiple prayers in the O.A. which cannot be considered as per the CAT (Procedure) Rules. They are making a prayer to declare certain paragraphs of the IREM Volume -I as ultra-vires as they are discriminatory which is not permitted under Article 14 of the Constitution of India. The other prayer is to allow the applicants to participate in the forthcoming selection process for promotion under the LDCE quota for the post of Good Guard, Station Master, Traffic Apprentice etc. Since multiple reliefs cannot be considered in the same O.A.. The main relief sought in the O.A. is being dealt with. The applicants made a joint representation (Annexure A-19) to VISHAL 2026.01.12 KUSHWAH 11:46:26+05'30' 11 Reserved the respondents for permission to appear in the selection process of Goods Guard under the LDCE quota. The respondents have rejected the representation vide letter dated 13.07.2018 (Annexure A-21) giving the following justification:-
"On verification of the above representation. It is to inform you that in accordance with Para 124 of IREM Vol-1 and CPO/BSP's Estt. Rule No: 89/2017, the non-ministerial staff of Operating and Commercial departments with a minimum three years regular service only are eligible for appearing in the selection to the post of Goods Guard against 15% LDCE Quota and the shortfall of LDCE will be carry forwarded to GDCE which will open for all departments."
From the above, it is evident that the respondents have rejected the representation on the ground that the applicants do not possess the requisite qualification to be considered for the post of Goods Guard being from the technical category (Track Maintainer) against 15% LDCE quota.
09. We also take note of the fact that the applicants had earlier filed an O.A. No. 203/671/2018 dated 13.07.2018 on the same issue before this Tribunal which was withdrawn with a liberty to file a fresh Application.
10. In light of the detailed justification given by the respondents in their reply and also communicated to the applicants vide letter dated VISHAL 2026.01.12 KUSHWAH 11:46:26+05'30' 12 Reserved 13.07.2018 (Annexure A/21), we are of the considered view that a decision on the eligibility criterion for a particular post, is the prerogative of the respondents and no interference is warranted by this Tribunal. This is a policy decision which falls within the administrative domain of the respondent authorities. The applicants cannot claim their eligibility to a particular post as a matter of right or agitate to participate in the selection process more so when the rules do not permit.
11. In the case of State of Punjab and Ors. Vs. Jagjit Singh and Ors. 2017 (1) SCC 148 the Hon'ble Apex Court has consistently held as follows:-
"the equation of post and determination of pay scales is the primary function of the executive and not the judiciary and therefore ordinarily court will not enter upon the task of job evaluation which is generally left to the expert bodies like the Pay Commissions. This is because such job evaluation exercise may include various factors including the relevant date and scales for evaluating performances of different groups of employees, and such evaluation would be both difficult and time consuming, apart from carrying financial implications."
VISHAL 2026.01.12 KUSHWAH 11:46:26+05'30' 13 Reserved
11. Hence, in view of the observations made in the preceding paragraphs and the case laws on the subject, we do not find any merit in this Original Application.
12. Accordingly, this Original Application is dismissed. No order as to costs.
(MallikaArya) (Akhil Kumar Srivastava) Administrative Member Judicial Member Shashi/Vk VISHAL 2026.01.12 KUSHWAH 11:46:26+05'30'