Ashish Kumar Yadav vs Union Of India & Ors.

By Justice Rajiv Joshi, Member (Judicial)

Heard Shri Rakesh Kumar Dixit, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Anil Kumar, learned counsel for the respondents.

With the consent of the counsel for the parties, the matter is being heard and decided finally at the admissions stage itself.

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is working as Junior Clerk-cum-Typist, Level-2 in the Personnel Department of Prayagraj Division, North Central Railway. He was selected through the RRB NTPC-2019 recruitment and was allotted to the Personnel Branch. According to the applicant, candidates selected through the same recruitment process were allotted to different ministerial branches, such as Personnel, S&T, Electrical, Engineering and Mechanical, and thereafter their promotional opportunities have not remained uniform. The applicant has also referred to the subsequent instructions issued by the Railway Board/NCR Headquarters regarding merger of ministerial cadres and preparation/maintenance of centralized common grade-wise seniority.

The grievance of the applicant, in substance, is that despite the aforesaid instructions regarding centralized/common seniority and merger Central Administrative Tribunal^{of ministerial cadres, promotion/selection processes under the 66 2/3%} Promotional Quota have been undertaken branch-wise, resulting, according to him, in unequal and adverse promotional consequences for employees who were selected through the same RRB NTPC-2019 recruitment. The applicant has particularly challenged the seniority position and the subsequent promotional process on the ground that employees transferred/merged from other branches have been placed above him, while the promotional process in the Personnel Branch is being proceeded with before the common grade-wise seniority is finally determined. He has further raised grievance regarding the inclusion of employees transferred from the Engineering Branch and the manner in which the merger of cadres and seniority is being undertaken.

It is further submitted that the applicant submitted a detailed representation dated 16.09.2026 before the competent authority, specifically raising the issues relating to the merger of cadres, common seniority, branch-wise promotional process and the consequential prejudice likely to be caused to him. However, instead of deciding the said representation, the respondents issued communication dated 17.09.2026 fixing 09.10.2026 as the date of examination, leaving the grievance of the applicant unattended. The representation placed on record also raises, inter alia, the issues of unequal promotional opportunities, merger/absorption of employees from other branches, alteration of seniority and continuation of promotional exercises before finalization of common seniority.

Learned counsel for the respondents, on the other hand, submitted that the grievance raised by the applicant may be considered by the competent authority in accordance with the applicable rules and instructions. He, however, submitted that the respondents shall take an appropriate decision on the representation of the applicant.

In view of the nature of the grievance raised by the applicant and the Central Administrative Tribunal^{fact that the applicant has already submitted a detailed representation} dated 16.09.2026 before the competent authority, we are of the considered view that, instead of entering into the merits of the matter at this stage, it would be appropriate to dispose of the present Original Application by directing the competent authority to consider and decide the said representation in accordance with law. Accordingly, the competent authority among the respondents is directed to consider and decide the applicant's representation dated 16.09.2026, along with the documents relied upon by him, by passing a reasoned and speaking order, in accordance with the applicable rules/instructions and after taking into consideration the relevant instructions of the Railway Board/NCR Headquarters concerning merger of ministerial cadres and centralized/common seniority. Let the aforesaid exercise be completed within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Needless to say, while considering the representation, the competent authority shall deal with the specific grievances raised by the applicant regarding his seniority and the promotional process and shall communicate the decision so taken to him forthwith.

With the aforesaid observation and direction, the Original Application is disposed of.

There shall be no order as to costs.

All pending M.As, if any, shall be treated as disposed of.