Central Administrative Tribunal - Cuttack
Subash Chandra Lenka vs M/O Railways on 2 February, 2026
1 O.A.No. 260/00057 of 2020
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK
O.A.No. 260/00057 of 2020
Reserved on 30.01.2026 Pronounced on 02.02.2026
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE SHRI SUDHI RANJAN MISHRA, MEMBER (J)
THE HON'BLE SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR DAS, MEMBER (A)
Subash Chandra Lenka aged about 57 years,
S/o Late Sridhar Lenka, working as
Technician-I, under Sr. DEE/TRS/
Bondamunda, District:-Sundargarh, residing
At:-Qr. No.PWD/LA-4, Labour Tenament, Jail
Road, Po:-Panposh, Rourkela-4, District:-
Sundargarh.
......Applicant
VERSUS
1. Union of India, South Eastern Railway being
represented through it General Manager, At:
Garden Rich-43, Kolkata, West Bengal. Pin
No.700043.
2. Divisional Railway Manager, South Eastern
Railway, At:-Chakradharpur Division,
At/Po/Ps:-Chakradharpur, Jharkhanda. Pin
No.833102.
3. Senior Divisional Personal Officer, South
Eastern Railway, At:-Chakradharpur Division,
At/Po/Ps:-Chakradharpur, Jharkhanda. Pin
No.833102.
4. Senior Divisional Electrical Engineer, (TRS)
South Eastern Railway, At:-Bandhamunda,
RAVI KUMAR
2026.02.02
09:54:57 +05'30'
2 O.A.No. 260/00057 of 2020
Electric Loco shed, At/Po/Ps:-Bandhamunda,
District:-Sundargarh. Pin No.770032.
5. Ramesh Chandra Meena, working as
Technician-I, under Sr.
DEE/TRS/Bondamunda, District:-Sundargarh.
Pin No.770032.
6. Kumari Sangita Mishra, working as
Technician-I, under Sr.
DEE/TRS/Bondamunda, District:-Sundargarh.
Pin No.770032.
......Respondents
For the applicant : Mr. B.R.Barik, Counsel
For the respondents : Mr. B.Swain, Counsel
O R D E R
PRAMOD KUMAR DAS, MEMBER (A):
Filtering the case establishes that while the applicant was working in one seniority Unit [S.E.Rly. Bondamunda] as Khalasi since 21.01.1989, he was transferred to another seniority Unit [Dongoaposi], in his present capacity, where he reported to duty on 25.12.1996. On 05.06.2003, seniority list of Tech.III of Bondamunda seniority unit was published wherein his name did not find place. He was repatriated back to his parent seniority Unit on 16.07.2003. Departmental examination was held for promotion to the post of Jr. Engineer but the applicant could not RAVI KUMAR 2026.02.02 09:54:57 +05'30' 3 O.A.No. 260/00057 of 2020 get the chance to appear since his name did not figure in the Seniority List of Tech.III. However, subsequently, on his repatriation and, on consideration of his representation, he was granted promotion to Tech.III w.e.f. 03/04.10.1997, i.e. the date when his immediate junior Sri H.Nag Bansi was promoted. On restructuring of cadre of JE, some of the JEs were empanelled for Sr. Section Engineer w.e.f. 01.11.2003 vide order dated 19.02.2015. According to the applicant, he was deprived of appearing at the JE Examination earlier since his name did not figure in the list of eligible employees to appear at the examination for promotion to JE (TRS and RSO) in absence of his name in the gradation list of Tech.III published 05.06.2003. It is further stated that the respondents published the names of eligible Tech.III vide letter dated 23.12.2019 to appear at the JE examination sought to be held on 02.01.2020 but even though he was promoted retrospectively to Tech.III w.e.f. 03/04.10.1997, his name also did not figure in the said list. Hence, he has filed this OA wherein his prayer is to direct the respondents to consider his case for promotion to the post of SEE w.e.f. RAVI KUMAR 2026.02.02 09:54:57 +05'30' 4 O.A.No. 260/00057 of 2020 01.11.2013 when his juniors, i.e. Resp. Nos. 5 and 6, got promoted and to restore his seniority above his juniors in the provisional seniority list of Tech.III within a time to be fixed by this Bench.
2. In this OA, 1 to 4 are official respondents and Sri Ramesh Chandra Meena and Kumari Sangita Mishra are respondents 5 and 6 respectively. Notices were issued to all the respondents. No separate counter has been filed by Res. 5 & 6 despite several adjournments given in this OA.
3. Respondents 1 to 4 filed their counter stating inter alia that applicant joined as Khalasi on 21.11.1989 under S.E.Rly. at Bondamunda in Chakradharpur Division. In his present capacity, he was transferred to Dongoaposi Railway Station in Chakradharpur Division of S.E.Rly. where, after availing medical leave, he reported to duty on 25.12.1996. The place where he initially joined and the place to which he was transferred are two different seniority units. A selection for promotion to Tech.III was held on 16.03.1997, 21.05.1997 and 30.05.1997 and a provisional panel containing 22 names for promotion to Skilled RAVI KUMAR 2026.02.02 09:54:57 +05'30' 5 O.A.No. 260/00057 of 2020 Fitter (Tech) Gr.III against 25% vacancies of literate quota (LDCE) of Electrical Loco Shed, Bondamunda was published on 25.06.1997. The name of the applicant did not contain therein since he was serving in another seniority unit in Dongoaposi Railway Station. At his own request, on 12.07.2001 he was transferred to Rourkela against existing vacancy and, thereafter, he was transferred back to Bondamunda on administrative interest without affecting his original seniority in existing grade and capacity vide order dated 16.07.2003.
Considering his grievance, although, he was not within the same seniority group of TRS, Bondamunda, the benefit of promotion to Tech.III was extended to him w.e.f. 04.10.1997 against 20% departmental quota under next below rule, i.e. from the date his junior, i.e. Sri H.Nag Bansi, was promoted. It is stated that since the matter being of more than 20 years old, the period of reservation of documents having been over, the document relating to notification/promotion to Tech.III is not traceable. Since, Sri H.Nag Bansi was promoted meanwhile to Tech.II w.e.f. 01.11.2003, the applicant was also given promotion on proforma RAVI KUMAR 2026.02.02 09:54:57 +05'30' 6 O.A.No. 260/00057 of 2020 basis with effect from the said date i.e. 01.11.2003 and, thereafter, he was promoted as Tech.I and posted to ELS/TRS/Bondamunda vide order dated 03.07.2012. However, considering his grievance, his promotion to Tech.I was antedated to 24.10.2010 on proforma basis vide order dated 05.02.2019. Subsequently, he was promoted to Sr. Tech against DPQ w.e.f. 30.08.2019 vide order dated 30.08.2019. According to the respondents, the applicant did not raise any objection when he was transferred in 1996 from one seniority unit to another although he was very much aware that the seniority in both the units is maintained separately. He lodged his claim long after 22 years, which is impermissible in law.
It is stated that respondent No. 5 and 6 promoted to the post of JE w.e.f. 24.11.2005 but the applicant was not called for the selection since he was not coming under the zone of consideration. Subsequently, both of them were promoted to Sr. Section Engineer (SSE) in 2013 and since the applicant was junior to them, he was not promoted to the said post. It is the specific case of the Respondents that Respondent Nos. 5&6 were RAVI KUMAR 2026.02.02 09:54:57 +05'30' 7 O.A.No. 260/00057 of 2020 promoted to the post of Junior Engineer after becoming successful in the examination conducted by the Department and, thereafter, to the post of Senior Section Engineer. Since, the applicant did not become Junior Engineer; question of his promotion to the post of Senior Section Engineer does not arise. Accordingly, Respondents have prayed for dismissal of this OA both on merit as well as delay and laches.
4. The applicant has filed rejoinder stating that the respondents have transferred him from one seniority unit to another without protecting his seniority which had caused him loss on promotional aspects. However, on returning to his parent division, he was given promotion retrospectively but not to the JE and, thereafter to SSE as had been given to Res. 5&6 who were promoted to Tech.III much after him.
5. We have heard learned counsel appearing for the Applicant and learned counsel appearing for the official respondents.
6. After making intense scrutiny of the entire matters, it is established that the applicant was transferred from RAVI KUMAR 2026.02.02 09:54:57 +05'30' 8 O.A.No. 260/00057 of 2020 Bondamunda [one seniority unit] to Dongoaposi [another seniority unit] vide order dated 12.02.1996 where he without any demur or protest reported on 25.12.1996. According to the applicant, the gradation list of Tech.III of Bondamunda was published on 05.06.2003, which was prior to his reposting to Bondamunda vide order dated 16.07.2003. After consideration of his representation he was promoted to Tech.III w.e.f. 04.10.1997, Tech.II from 01.11.2003 and Tech.I vide order dated 03.07.2012, i.e. the date of promotion of his immediate junior Sri H.Nag Bansi. Respondents issued the names of the existing JEs for suitability test for promotion to Sr. Section Engineer due to restructuring of cadre vide notification dated 19.02.2015. Applicant submitted representation on 03.10.2017 stating that ignoring his seniority in Tech.III his juniors were given promotion to JE and SSE from 01.11.2013 even without considering his appeal. Applicant's promotion to Tech.I was subsequently antedated to 24.10.2010 on proforma basis vide order dated 05.02.2019 and to Sr. Tech w.e.f. 30.08.2019 vide order dated 30.08.2019.
RAVI KUMAR 2026.02.02 09:54:57 +05'30' 9 O.A.No. 260/00057 of 2020
7. In this OA, filed on 31.01.2020, the prayer of the applicant is for direction to the respondents to restore his position in the seniority list of Tech.III published on list of 05.06.2003 but admittedly, he did not avail the opportunity available to him under the Act and Rules then and there even when his representation, if any, made by him did not receive due consideration. Further, the applicant in worst could have raised his grievance when he was given promotion to Tech. III on his rejoining at Bondamunda w.e.f. 04.10.1997. But, he slept over the matter and wake up from slumber in 2020. Thus, this prayer of the applicant is hit by the provision provided under Section 21 of the AT Act, 1985. Law assists only the wakeful and not those who sleep on their rights: vigilantibus non dormientibus jura subveniunt [vide Divyagna kumari Harisinh Parmar and others versus Union of India and others, 2025 INSC 1145. Further, it is trite position of law that seniority once settled cannot be unsettled after a long lapse of time in the wake of principle of a chaotic situation to arrive and also under public policy, as ruled by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sarat Chandra Mishra RAVI KUMAR 2026.02.02 09:54:57 +05'30' 10 O.A.No. 260/00057 of 2020 Vs. State of Orissa, 2006 (1) SCALE 9. In view of the facts and law, allowing the prayer of the applicant for inclusion of his name in the list of Tech.III published on 05.06.2003 would tantamount to unsettling the settled position of seniority after a long lapse of time that too on the application filed by the applicant which is grossly barred by the law of limitation.
8. The next prayer of the applicant is for direction to promote him to the post of SSE/SEE w.e.f. 01.11.2013, i.e. the date of promotion of Resp. 5 and 6 is concerned, according to the respondents, in terms of Estt. Sl. No. 108/2013, names of JEs who were coming within the zone of consideration was notified for promotion to SSE w.e.f. 01.11.2013 and, as the applicant was not working as JE but as Tech.I as on 01.11.2013, which name did not contain in the said list. We find that the names of the existing JEs for suitability test for promotion to Sr. Section Engineer due to restructuring of cadre was issued vide notification dated 19.02.2015. Applicant submitted representation on 03.10.2017 whereas he filed this OA on 31.01.2020 even without making any such prayer to promote him to JE, which prayer is also grossly RAVI KUMAR 2026.02.02 09:54:57 +05'30' 11 O.A.No. 260/00057 of 2020 barred by limitation. Hence, going by Section 21 of the AT Act, 1985 and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of H. Guruswamy & Ors. Vs. A. Krishnaiah since deceased by LRs., Civil Appeal No. 317 OF 2025 (@Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 9719/2020) disposed of on 8th January, 2025, D.C.S. Negi v. Union of India & others (Civil Appeal No.7956 of 2011) decided on 7.3.2011/2011 SCC online SC 21, and the decision of the jurisdictional Hon'ble High Court of Orissa in the case titled UOI & Ors. Vs. Biswanath Kumar & Anr., W.P.(C) No. 6268/2021 dated 31.07.2021, this prayer of the applicant is also held to be hit by the law of limitation.
9. In the result, the OA stands dismissed. Costs are made easy.
(Pramod Kumar Das) (Sudhi Ranjan Mishra)
Member (Admn.) Member (Judl.)
RK/PS
RAVI KUMAR
2026.02.02
09:54:57 +05'30'