Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Mahender Singh vs New Delhi Municipal Council on 2 April, 2026
1
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI
OA No.3257/2022
Reserved on: 25.03.2026
Pronounced on: 02.04.2026
Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J)
Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A)
Mahender Singh, aged 61 years,
(Group 'C' - Notional Promotion)
S/o Shri Ved Ram,
Retd. Sr. Electric Mechanic,
R/o H.No.458, Gali No.3,
Ambedkar Colony, Village Chakarpur,
Gurgaon - 122002 - Applicant
(By Advocate: M. MS Saini)
VERSUS
1. The Chairman,
New Delhi Municipal Council,
Palika Kendra, Parliament Street,
New Delhi-110001
2. The Secretary,
New Delhi Municipal Council,
Palika Kendra, Parliament Street,
New Delhi-110001
- Respondents
(By Advocate: Mr. Vaibhav Agnihotri]
1
LALIT
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI
OA No.198/2017
Reserved on: 14.01.2026
Pronounced on: 04.02.2026
Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J)
Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A)
Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj,
Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway,
Central Hospital, New Delhi,
Aged about 47 years,
R/o 158/16, Railway Colony,
Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant
(By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal)
VERSUS
1. Union of India,
Through its Secretary,
Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan,
New Delhi
2. General Manager (P),
Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi
3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad)
Through its Chairman,
DRM Office Complex,
Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad
4. DRM (P)
Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP
5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad,
Working as Lab. Supdt.
Sub Divisional Railway Hospital,
Itarasi, MP
GOSAIN
6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt.,
Northern Railway Divisional Hospital,
Lucknow, UP
7. Kulbhushan Doval, Working as Lab. Supdt.,
Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP - Respondents
(Mr. Pradeep Kr. Sharma, Mr. Piyush Gaur for respondents 1 to 4, Mr.
Somnath Bhattacharya with Mr. Pradeep Tripathi for respondents 4 & 5
2
ORDER
Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J):
By way of filing this Original Application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act,1985, the applicant has sought the following reliefs:-
"8.1 Direct the respondents to place the relevant records pertaining to the present OA before their Lordships for proper appreciation and adjudication in the matter in the interest of justice;
8.2 To quash and set aside impugned order dated 05.01.2022; and 8.3 allow the OA with all consequential benefits;
8.4 To direct the Respondents to grant notional promotion to the Applicant in the Pay scale of Rs.10,900-34800+Grade Pay Rs.4800/- and consequently revise the pensionary and other retiral benefits of the Applicant;
8.5 pass any other or further order or direction as this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case besides costs of the present litigation."
2. Brief facts of the case are that the Applicant, an SC employee, joined NDMC in the year 1995 as Electric Mechanic and, on account of his sincerity, hard work and devotion to duty, was promoted to the post of Senior Electric Mechanic in the year 2014. On 18.03.2021, NDMC issued a circular inviting applications from eligible employees for promotion to the post of Foreman (Sub-station) in the prescribed pay scale. Being fully eligible, the Applicant applied for the said post. Pursuant thereto, he was directed to appear in the Trade Test held on 15.06.2021, wherein only two employees including the Applicant qualified, and their names were placed in order of seniority for 1 LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS
1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi
2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi
3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad
4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP
5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.
Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP GOSAIN
6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP
7. Kulbhushan Doval, Working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP - Respondents (Mr. Pradeep Kr. Sharma, Mr. Piyush Gaur for respondents 1 to 4, Mr. Somnath Bhattacharya with Mr. Pradeep Tripathi for respondents 4 & 5 3 consideration by the Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC). The Applicant, being senior and belonging to the SC category, was well within the zone of consideration.
3. The DPC was initially scheduled to be held on 18.08.2021 but was postponed without any reasonable cause. The Applicant submitted a representation dated 25.08.2021 requesting that the DPC be convened urgently as he was due to retire on 31.08.2021. Thereafter, the DPC was rescheduled for 31.08.2021 but was again postponed due to the fault of the Respondents. Consequently, the Applicant retired on superannuation on 31.08.2021 without his case being considered for promotion. Subsequently, the Applicant submitted further representations dated 10.09.2021 and 07.10.2021 seeking grant of promotion after retirement in accordance with rules, but the same were rejected vide impugned order dated 05.01.2022. It later came to the Applicant's knowledge that the DPC was convened after his retirement, and he was excluded from the zone of consideration, while his junior, Shri Virender Kumar Shukla, was selected and promoted to the post of Foreman (Sub-station) vide office order dated 22.03.2022. The Applicant submits that grave injustice has been caused to him due to arbitrary and discriminatory action of the Respondents in delaying the DPC.
4. Counsel for the Applicant submits that the denial of promotion to the Applicant was solely on account of the delay in convening the DPC, which is entirely attributable to the Respondents, and such delay cannot be allowed to prejudice the Applicant. It is submitted that as per settled law, an employee cannot be made to suffer due to 1 LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS
1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi
2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi
3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad
4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP
5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.
Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP GOSAIN
6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP
7. Kulbhushan Doval, Working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP - Respondents (Mr. Pradeep Kr. Sharma, Mr. Piyush Gaur for respondents 1 to 4, Mr. Somnath Bhattacharya with Mr. Pradeep Tripathi for respondents 4 & 5 4 administrative lapses or procedural delays on the part of the department, and in such circumstances, the Applicant is entitled to notional promotion.
5. Counsel further submits that the Applicant had fulfilled all eligibility criteria, successfully qualified the Trade Test, and was within the zone of consideration prior to his retirement, and therefore, his right to be considered for promotion had crystallized.
6. It is further submitted that the Respondents cannot be permitted to take advantage of their own wrong by postponing the DPC twice and thereafter convening it after the Applicant's retirement, thereby excluding him and granting promotion to his junior.
7. Counsel argues that the right to be considered for promotion in a fair and equitable manner is a fundamental right, as recognized by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Union of India & Anr. vs. Hemraj Singh Chauhan & Ors., and the denial of such right in the present case is arbitrary and illegal. It is also contended that the Applicant, being a member of the SC category and the senior-most eligible candidate against a vacancy that arose prior to his retirement, has been unfairly and discriminatorily deprived of his rightful promotion.
8. The grounds urged are that the action of the Respondents is arbitrary, unreasonable and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India, as the Applicant has been denied equal opportunity and fair consideration. The delay in convening the DPC, which is attributable solely to the Respondents, has caused 1 LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS
1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi
2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi
3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad
4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP
5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.
Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP GOSAIN
6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP
7. Kulbhushan Doval, Working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP - Respondents (Mr. Pradeep Kr. Sharma, Mr. Piyush Gaur for respondents 1 to 4, Mr. Somnath Bhattacharya with Mr. Pradeep Tripathi for respondents 4 & 5 5 irreparable prejudice to the Applicant, and therefore, he is legally entitled to be granted notional promotion with all consequential benefits. It is further urged that there exist several judicial precedents supporting the grant of notional promotion in cases where delay in holding DPC results in denial of promotion, and hence, the impugned order rejecting the Applicant's claim is liable to be set aside.
9. Counsel for the respondents has filed the counter affidavit and submitted that the Applicant herein has filed the Original Application challenging the Impugned Order dated 05.01.2022 passed by the Respondents rejecting the representation of the Applicant for grant of promotion as Foreman (Sub-station) which has been denied to him. It is submitted that the present Application is totally misconceived as the same is devoid of any cause of action in favour of the Applicant and deserves to be dismissed in limine. It is further submitted that the Applicant is not entitled to any of the reliefs as sought by him in the present Application.
10. It is submitted that the Applicant while working as Senior Mechanic in Electrical Establishment-I of the NDMC, applied for the post of Foreman (Sub-station) with a pay scale of Rs. 10,900-34,800 + GP Rs 4,800/-. The Applicant, along with another candidate qualified in the Trade Test.
11. It is pertinent to mention that vide Office Order dated 08.07.2016, the composition of Departmental Promotion Committee ("DPC") (promotion from Group C to Group C and C to B) is as under:
1. Director (Personnel) - Chairman 2. Joint Director (Concerned Estt.) 1 LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS
1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi
2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi
3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad
4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP
5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.
Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP GOSAIN
6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP
7. Kulbhushan Doval, Working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP - Respondents (Mr. Pradeep Kr. Sharma, Mr. Piyush Gaur for respondents 1 to 4, Mr. Somnath Bhattacharya with Mr. Pradeep Tripathi for respondents 4 & 5 6 Electric Estt. - Member 3. Joint Director (from Personnel Deptt.) - Member 4. Representative of SC/ST (Liaison Officer) - Member 4/
12. It is submitted that a DPC was constituted vide Order dated 16.08.2021. However, the said DPC did not fulfil the prerequisites regarding quorum of the DPC as required under Order dated 08.07.2016 as Joint Director (Electric) was also holding the charge of the Personnel department. Accordingly, one member was short in the said composition of DPC. The issue was accordingly forwarded to the seniors and the name of the 4th member was approved. However, the DPC could not be conducted due to administrative exigencies and for want of infonnation.
13. It is submitted that it trite law held that mere time taken in consideration of the promotion would itself not create a vested right to promotion to a post with subsequent benefits and seniority. Thus, the relief claimed for by the Applicant is contrary to the established principle and judicial dicta.
14. Counsel for the respondents has vehemently denied that the DPC for selection to the Post of Foreman was postponed without any reasonable cause. It is submitted that a DPC was to be constituted vide order dated 16.08.2021. However, the said DPC did not fulfil the prerequisites regarding quorum of the DPC as required under Order dated 16.08.2021 as Joint Director (Electric) was also holding the charge of the Personnel department. Accordingly, one member was short in the said composition of DPC. The issue was accordingly forwarded to the seniors and the name of the 4th member was approved. However, the DPC could not be conducted due to the busy 1 LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS
1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi
2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi
3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad
4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP
5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.
Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP GOSAIN
6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP
7. Kulbhushan Doval, Working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP - Respondents (Mr. Pradeep Kr. Sharma, Mr. Piyush Gaur for respondents 1 to 4, Mr. Somnath Bhattacharya with Mr. Pradeep Tripathi for respondents 4 & 5 7 schedule of one of the Members of the DPC and for want of information. It is denied that the DPC was again postponed due to fault of the Respondents but was a genuine case in the eyes of law.
15. The representations of Applicant were considered by the Respondents and were reasoned with justifiable cause about which Applicant had prior knowledge. It is denied that grave injustice has been caused to the Applicant due to the arbitrary, discriminatory, umeasonable and unfair action of the Respondents for postponing the DPC. It was only when the prerequisites regarding quorum of the DPC was fulfilled that the DPC could be convened. It is denied that Respondent did not consider promotion of the Applicant instead he was eligible in all aspect and was successful in Trade Test.
16. Counsel for the respondents submitted that the sole reason for the rescheduling of the DPC was the lack of quorum as has been explained in detail in the paras above. Moreover, if Applicant was still working with the Respondents, he would have been considered and promoted rightfully.
17. It is submitted that the postponement of DPC was reasonable and not a deliberate one in scheduling of the DPC. It is submitted that if the department considers the retired employee for promotion, it will open the floodgates for number of frivolous litigations. It is further submitted that every case is unique depending upon its facts and circumstances and the present case is the genuine case where the composition of DPC could not be fulfilled as Joint Director (Electric) was also holding the charge of the Personnel department as being stated in the preliminary submissions. It is established 1 LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS
1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi
2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi
3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad
4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP
5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.
Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP GOSAIN
6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP
7. Kulbhushan Doval, Working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP - Respondents (Mr. Pradeep Kr. Sharma, Mr. Piyush Gaur for respondents 1 to 4, Mr. Somnath Bhattacharya with Mr. Pradeep Tripathi for respondents 4 & 5 8 principle of law that a time taken in consideration of the promotion would not create a vested right to promotion to a post with subsequent benefits and seniority. Thus the relief claimed by the Applicant is not maintainable.
18. Counsel for the respondents has contended that the reason for postponed DPC was reasonable cause. Moreover, Applicant was considered for the post of Foreman (Sub- Station) and was even successful in Trade Test. Non-selection of Applicant to the post of Foreman (Sub-Station) has nothing to do with Applicant being SC Category and that the case of Respondents for not scheduling timely DPC is genuine and justified. It is also denied that the action of the Respondents by way of denying notional promotion to the Applicant is arbitrary, unlawful and in contravention of Articles 14 and 19 of the Constitution guaranteeing equality before law and equal opportunity of law. The Impugned order is reasonable in the eyes of law.
19. Counsel for the applicant has filed the rejoinder affidavit and submitted that it is a settled legal position that delay on the part of the department in releasing promotion when due cannot operate to the prejudice of the candidate for such promotion, and therefore the action of the respondents in denying the claim of the applicant for notional promotion is illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. It is further submitted that as per the admitted seniority position, the applicant was the seniormost among the candidates who qualified the Trade Test for the post of Foreman (Sub-station), and even the respondents have admitted that 1 LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS
1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi
2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi
3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad
4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP
5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.
Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP GOSAIN
6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP
7. Kulbhushan Doval, Working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP - Respondents (Mr. Pradeep Kr. Sharma, Mr. Piyush Gaur for respondents 1 to 4, Mr. Somnath Bhattacharya with Mr. Pradeep Tripathi for respondents 4 & 5 9 the applicant would have been selected but for the lack of quorum of the DPC. It is contended that the DPC was postponed twice despite the applicant having informed the respondents about his impending superannuation on 31.08.2021, and the respondents deliberately convened the DPC after his retirement to extend the benefit to his junior, which amounts to hostile discrimination.
20. Counsel for the applicant has placed reliance on the judgment in Chaman Lal Lakhanpal vs. UPSC & Ors., wherein it has been held that retirement cannot be a ground to deny consideration for promotion if the right had accrued earlier, and the employee is entitled to be considered notionally with consequential benefits. It is further submitted that the applicant has a substantive cause of action as he was eligible and senior most but was denied consideration due to procedural delays attributable solely to the respondents. The record itself shows that the DPC scheduled prior to his retirement was postponed, and even the internal noting reflects that both eligible officials were to be promoted, yet no timely action was taken.
21. It is argued that the respondents cannot take advantage of their own wrong, particularly when the applicant had repeatedly requested expeditious conduct of the DPC before his retirement. The delay on account of administrative reasons such as busy schedule of members or want of information cannot be considered a valid justification in service law, and the applicant cannot be made to suffer for such lapses. The contention of the respondents regarding 1 LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS
1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi
2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi
3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad
4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP
5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.
Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP GOSAIN
6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP
7. Kulbhushan Doval, Working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP - Respondents (Mr. Pradeep Kr. Sharma, Mr. Piyush Gaur for respondents 1 to 4, Mr. Somnath Bhattacharya with Mr. Pradeep Tripathi for respondents 4 & 5 10 quorum is stated to be illogical and untenable, especially when DPCs have allegedly been held in the past with similar composition.
22. Counsel for the applicant reiterates that the applicant had become eligible for consideration well before his retirement and had successfully qualified the Trade Test, but was denied the opportunity of consideration due to delay in convening the DPC, which amounts to denial of a valuable right. The admission of the respondents that he would have been selected further strengthens his claim. It is submitted that denial of notional promotion in such circumstances results in grave injustice, particularly when the delay is wholly attributable to the respondents and not to the applicant. It is also submitted that the applicant had exhausted all available remedies by making repeated representations, both oral and written, which remained unheeded, and therefore the stand of the respondents is biased, unjustified and contrary to settled principles of law.
23. Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the pleadings and material available on record, the controversy in the present Original Application revolves around whether the applicant, who admittedly retired on 31.08.2021 prior to the convening of the Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC), is entitled to grant of notional promotion on account of delay in holding the DPC.
24. It is not in dispute that the applicant had applied for the post of Foreman (Sub-station), qualified the trade test, and was within the zone of consideration. It is also a matter of record that the DPC, though initially proposed prior to his retirement, could not be convened and was ultimately held after his superannuation. The 1 LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS
1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi
2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi
3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad
4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP
5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.
Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP GOSAIN
6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP
7. Kulbhushan Doval, Working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP - Respondents (Mr. Pradeep Kr. Sharma, Mr. Piyush Gaur for respondents 1 to 4, Mr. Somnath Bhattacharya with Mr. Pradeep Tripathi for respondents 4 & 5 11 principal grievance of the applicant is that such delay is attributable to the respondents and, therefore, he ought not to be prejudiced and should be granted notional promotion with consequential benefits.
25. The respondents, on the other hand, have satisfactorily explained the circumstances leading to the postponement of the DPC. The material on record reflects that the DPC could not be convened on the scheduled dates due to lack of quorum, arising out of overlapping charge of one of the members, and thereafter due to administrative exigencies and want of requisite information. It has also been demonstrated that the DPC was constituted only after fulfilling the prescribed composition requirements. Thus, the delay cannot be said to be arbitrary, malafide, or deliberate, but rather due to procedural and administrative constraints. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Union of India vs. Hemraj Singh Chauhan, (2010)4 SCC 290, has observed that though the authorities are expected to convene DPCs in a timely manner, delay occasioned due to bona fide administrative reasons would not ipso facto entitle an employee to retrospective promotion.
26. The settled position of law is that mere inclusion in the zone of consideration or qualification in a selection process does not confer a vested right to promotion. The right that accrues to an employee is only a right to be considered for promotion in accordance with rules, and not a right to promotion itself, as held in Shankarsan Dash vs. Union of India, (1991)3 SCC 47 wherein it was laid down that even a candidate selected for appointment does not acquire an indefeasible right to appointment. This principle has been reiterated in service 1 LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS
1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi
2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi
3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad
4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP
5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.
Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP GOSAIN
6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP
7. Kulbhushan Doval, Working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP - Respondents (Mr. Pradeep Kr. Sharma, Mr. Piyush Gaur for respondents 1 to 4, Mr. Somnath Bhattacharya with Mr. Pradeep Tripathi for respondents 4 & 5 12 jurisprudence in Union of India vs. K.V. Jankiraman, (1991)4 SCC 109, holding that promotion can be granted only when it is actually due and recommended by the DPC. In the present case, admittedly, the applicant could not be considered by the DPC as it had not convened prior to his retirement. Once the applicant stood superannuated, he ceased to be in service, and there was no occasion to consider his case for promotion unless the rules specifically provide for such consideration, which is not the case here.
27. The contention of the applicant that the respondents cannot take advantage of their own wrong would have merit only if the delay was shown to be intentional, arbitrary, or actuated by malafides. However, in the present case, the reasons furnished by the respondents regarding lack of quorum and administrative difficulties have not been effectively rebutted. There is nothing on record to establish that the DPC was deliberately deferred to deny promotion to the applicant or to favour his junior. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Ajit Singh (II) vs. State of Punjab, (1999)7 SCC 209 has held that a claim under Articles 14 and 16 would arise only when arbitrariness or hostile discrimination is clearly established.
28. The reliance placed by the applicant on the judgment in Chaman Lal Lakhanpal vs. UPSC & Ors. and other precedents is distinguishable on facts. In those cases, the delay was found to be unjustified or the right to consideration had crystallized in a manner that warranted retrospective or notional promotion. In the present case, however, the DPC itself had not convened prior to the 1 LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS
1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi
2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi
3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad
4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP
5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.
Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP GOSAIN
6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP
7. Kulbhushan Doval, Working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP - Respondents (Mr. Pradeep Kr. Sharma, Mr. Piyush Gaur for respondents 1 to 4, Mr. Somnath Bhattacharya with Mr. Pradeep Tripathi for respondents 4 & 5 13 applicant's retirement, and therefore no recommendation in his favour existed nor had the process reached a stage where any enforceable right could be said to have accrued. The distinction between a mere expectation and a legally enforceable right has been explained by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Mysore vs. Syed Mahmood, (1968) 3 SCR 363.
29. Similarly, the reliance on the principle that an employee should not suffer due to administrative delay cannot be applied in a blanket manner. Each case must be examined on its own facts. Where the delay is bona fide and attributable to valid administrative reasons, and not due to arbitrariness or negligence of such magnitude as to vitiate the process, the grant of notional promotion after retirement cannot be claimed as a matter of right. In Union of India vs. K.K. Vadera, (1989) Supp(2) SCC 625, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that promotion is not a matter of course and depends upon fulfillment of conditions and actual consideration by the competent authority.
30. The argument that the applicant was senior and belonged to the SC category also does not advance his case, as there is no material to show that any reservation policy was violated or that any discrimination was practiced. The non-consideration of the applicant was solely on account of the DPC not being held prior to his retirement, and not on account of any bias or hostile discrimination. In Indra Sawhney vs. Union of India, (1992) Supp(3) SCC 217, the Hon'ble Supreme Court clarified that reservation operates within the 1 LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS
1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi
2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi
3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad
4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP
5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.
Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP GOSAIN
6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP
7. Kulbhushan Doval, Working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP - Respondents (Mr. Pradeep Kr. Sharma, Mr. Piyush Gaur for respondents 1 to 4, Mr. Somnath Bhattacharya with Mr. Pradeep Tripathi for respondents 4 & 5 14 framework of service rules and does not override the requirement of consideration in accordance with procedure.
31. It is also relevant to note that accepting the contention of the applicant would amount to directing consideration of all retired employees for promotion in cases where DPCs are delayed due to administrative reasons, which would be contrary to established service jurisprudence and may lead to anomalous situations. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Union of India vs. Tarsem Singh, (2008)8 SCC 648, cautioned that service-related claims must be examined within settled legal principles so as to avoid opening floodgates of litigation and unsettling administrative processes.
32. In view of the above discussion, we are of the considered opinion that the applicant has failed to establish arbitrariness, illegality, or violation of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India in the action of the respondents. The impugned order dated 05.01.2022 does not suffer from any infirmity warranting interference.
33. Accordingly, the Original Application is dismissed. No order as to costs.
(Dr. Sumeet Jerath) (Harvinder Kaur Oberoi)
Member (A) Member (J)
/lg/
1
LALIT
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS
1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi
2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi
3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad
4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP
5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.
Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP GOSAIN
6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP
7. Kulbhushan Doval, Working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP - Respondents (Mr. Pradeep Kr. Sharma, Mr. Piyush Gaur for respondents 1 to 4, Mr. Somnath Bhattacharya with Mr. Pradeep Tripathi for respondents 4 & 5