Central Administrative Tribunal - Kolkata
Kazi Md Ebrahim Bari vs Eastern Railway on 23 December, 2022
ENE & is 8 ? ga1626.2021 & Anr 2.2. Aggrieved with the impugned speaking order 22.01.2021 rejecting N the case of the applicant for appointment as a land loser due to over age, he has approached this Tribunal under Section 19 of the Adroinistrative Tribunals Act, 1985, praying for the following reliel* "A The order dated 22.07.2027 passed by ane Manavir Singh, Princisal, Chief Personnel Officer, Eastern Railway in order No. E- 3684and fosers Court GaseyPttiBiswanath Mali & 34 Others dafad 227.2027 fs discriminatory and as such is not tenable in the eye of law and as such the same is liable to be set aside and quashed By) An Order do issue directing the respondents to appoint the applicant No. 7 in Group -D post under ihe railway under {he Land Losssers category af an early date."
2.3, It is the case of the applicant that, pursuant to a notification issued by the Raibvays for construction of Railway project, namely, Jankuni-Furfara Sheuwif New Broad Gauge line the district of Hooghly, d by the Railway West Bengal, the Jand uf the apphoant was ac quire Authorities. A Cirenlar being RBE 99 of 8010 was issued on L607 2010 for appoiitment of land losers affected by land acquisition for railway projects. The applicant appled for such appointment with necessary details. However, his case has net been considered, being aggrieved, he approached this Tribunal vide O.A 526.2015, which came to be disposed of vide order dated 214.2615. Thereafter, the applicants im the said OA, fled one MLA 988.2019 arising out of OA S26/2015 ne execution of i SEE the arder dated 214.2015. The said M.A came to be disposed of vide order dated 15.08.2020, operative portion of the order is reproduced as under
"4. Le. counsel for the respondents does not object te such submission, and, accordingly, without entering iste the merits of the matter, we hereby direct directing the respondent authorities to dispase of the representations of the applicants to the MLA praying for appointment as land losers in the context ef RBE 99/2010 and to decide in accordance with law with particular reference to the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court at Calcutta in WPCT Me. 74/2078.
3 0a1626.2021 & Anr The respondent authorities shall dispose of the prayers of the applicants to the VA, if pending at their end for disposal, within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of coy of this order."
2.4. The respondents in compliance of the said order dated 13.02.2020 passed a speaking order on 22.01.2021 rejecting the case of the applicants, in the case of the present applicant, he was found unsuitable due to overage and under education. Hence, this O.A.
3. Ld. counsel for the applicant submits that that this Tribunal had directed to consider the case of the applicant in the light of WPCT 74/2016. He would also place reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court in WPCT 28/2021 with WPCT 75/2020 and submits that the applicant is also a similarly placed person.
4. At hearing, Ld. counsel for the applicant would submit that a direction may be issued to the respondents to consider the case of the applicant in the light of the Railway Circular RBE 99/2010 dated 16.07.2010 and in terms of the order passed by this Tribunal O.A 350/1313/2019 and other identical O.As, vide order dated 16.03.2020 as well as in terms of the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court supra, passed in similarly circumstanced cases, the applicant is also entitled for appointment since he is also similarly placed person and that would be satisfied if appropriate direction is issued to the competent authority to cousider his case.
5. Considering the above submission, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the claim of the applicant, we deem it fit to dispose of this OA at this stage with a direction upon the respondents that without influence on their earlier decisions to re-examine the case of the applicant in the light of the Circular RBE 99/2010, referred to herein above, along with the extant rules and policy in vogue as well as various orders passed y, PF).
4.0a1626.2021 & Anr by this Tribunal and the Hon'ble High Court (supra). [t is expected that the eompetent authority shall consider and decide the representation/claim of the applicant expeditiously not later than 90 days from the date of reeeipt of a copy of this order and the decision thereon be intimated to the applicant forthwith.
6. In view of the above, both the O.As stands disposed of. 7, MLA 3560/2022, arising out of O.A 939/2022, praying for condonation of delay in preferring the Q.A, on being satisfied with the grounds put forth, same is allawedl.
y X x ' SY (Suchitto Humar Das} (Mr, Jayesh V. Bhanravia) MemberXA) Member (2) ¥ ae