Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

(a) SC

(b) ST

(c) OBC

(d) Ex-servicemen

(e) Physically handicapped

(f) Unreserved candidates.

Total However, the actual recruitment is different. No candidates have been selected from the wards of ICF employees. The selection of 118 ST candidates as against 9 to be selected is bad in law. The idea of selection of local candidates has been given a go bye. It is evident from the distribution of the selected candidates. As regards OBC only 248 should have been selected. But the department has selected 387 candidates. As regards PH candidates 28 should have been selected. The department has selected only 18. Selection has been done at the whims and fancies of respondent No. 4. Respondent 4 has not given any importance to the selection of local candidates. He has resorted to selection of 654 candidates from other states and used the selection committee to his advantage. On the first two days when the respondent No. 4 played a vital role, 78 candidates were selected out of 150 interviewed. The applicant association is entitled to file the application. It is immaterial that the applicant association is not a recognised one. As per the instructions of the Railway administration, all the factions in the SC/ST Association have to be recognised till the elections are complete and new office bearers assume charge. The applicant association is a registered association and has aright to file the applications. The respondents are making inconsistent statements. The respondent No. 5 is awaiting confirmation as Assistant Personnel Officer and she was selected as a Committee member to further the interest of respondent No. 4. The respondent No. 4 even saw to it that vigilance officer Satyanarayanan proceeded on leave and thereafter on voluntary retirement. The respondent No. 4 played a vital role in the matter of selection. This is admitted by the respondents that all the officers associated with the selection committees were given a brief in the meeting room on 20.6.98 and the norms to be followed in the selection. The allocation of marks gave room for arbitrary awarding of marks. It is the policy of the ICF that only one ward of serving Railway employee and on the verge of retirement and that of the retired employee should be given employment. More than one ward cannot be given employment. Selection of a large number of candidates in the first two days has to be properly explained.

SI. No. Category of candidates Cut off rank

1.

Unreserved (UR)

2. Scheduled Caste (SC)

3. Scheduled Tribe (ST)

4. Other Backward Classes (OBC)

5. Ex-servicemen 11068

6. Physically Handicapped    

(a) Ortho Handicapped  

(b) Deaf and Mute 11507 The applicant cannot be aggrieved over empanelment of more SC/ST candidates. 262 candidates have been selected from among the wards of serving/retired employees of ICF and another 205 from among the wards of other Railway employees both aggregating to 457 i.e. nearly 50% of the total intake. It is also to be noted that there is a horizontal reservation of 20% for ex-servicemen which works out to 183 candidates. Naturally there cannot be any candidate from among the wards of ICF employed under the category of ex-servicemen. If this number is excluded from 917 the percentage of wards of ICF and other Railway employees will work out to 63.6% of the total numbers selected. There is no scope for taking blind persons in the production unit. Only 18 candidates consisting of 9 orthopedically handicapped and 9 deaf & mute were selected against the PH quota. The first applicant is only an Association of SC/ST Railway employees. Candidates coming for recruitment cannot be a member of the association of serving employees. Therefore, the first applicant cannot claim to represent the candidates even before their appointment and on this ground alone, the O.A. is not maintainable. Only a candidate who appeared for selection can be aggrieved over his non-selection. Selection has been done on the basis of performance of the candidates in the selection. There has been no violation of the set procedure/guidelines. Leave taken by Satyanarayan, the vigilance officer and his voluntary retirement was not at the instance of 4th respondent. The allegation is baseless. The allocation of marks under four heads is being followed in the Southern Railway also. The same allocation pattern had been followed in the selection held by the respondents in 1989-90. There has been no procedural irregularity and arbitrariness in the recruitment process. The O.A. is liable to be dismissed for non-joinder of necessary parties since the selected candidates whose selection is being questioned in the present O.A. have not been impleaded as party respondents.

38. For filing application under Section 19 of the Act, not only proper cause of action must have arisen but also the applicant should have locus standi to present the application. There is no difficulty in saying that a cause of action had arisen. The difficulty of locus standi arises only in the case of the application in O.A. 93/99. O. A.93/99 had been filed by All India SC/ST Railway Employees Association, ICF Zone and another individual applicant by name Antony Raj.

39. It is the contention of the respondents that the first applicant in this case is not a recognised union that it is only a factional group and it cannot be an aggrieved party in the matter of recruitment and hence it cannot be an applicant. It is the case of the applicant that it is a registered union and in its capacity as a registered union of employees it is entitled to file the application questioning the selection process. It is also mentioned that elections to the SC/ST Association had not yet been held and therefore, there is no question of any recognised union.