Devender Kumar & Anr. vs Union Of India & Ors.

Per : Hon’ble Shri Lok Ranjan, Member (A)

The present O.A. has been filed by two similarly placed Applicants, seeking to be considered for the post of Assistant Station Master (A.S.M.) through the process conducted pursuant to General Departmental Competitive Examination (G.D.C.E.) Notification No.02/2015 dated 12.06.2015 that was issued by the North Western Railway (N.W.R.) for the notified vacancies in various posts, including category-wise break-up ; specifically impugning the Order dated 29.09.2017 issued by the Respondent No.2, i.e. the Chairman, Railway Recruitment Cell (R.R.C.) of the N.W.R. conveying that no replacement panel could be furnished to replace any candidates selected through the G.D.C.E. on the panel for A.S.M. post vacancies, who did not turn up or were found medically unfit.

Based on the pleadings available on record, the relevant matrix of facts had emerged to be as follows briefly. The R.R.C., N.W.R. had issued the G.D.C.E. Notification No.02/2015 dated 12.06.2015, inviting applications through proper channel from serving regular railway employees for filling up of vacancies against the G.D.C.E. quota in the various posts under the N.W.R. The Applicants, who belong to SC-category, had submitted the online application forms for the post of A.S.M. in the Pay Band Rs.(5200-20200)/- and Grade Pay Rs.2800/-, for which 38 (20-UR, 06-SC, 03-ST, 09-OBC) vacancies were notified. In due course, the Applicants had also appeared at the Online Written Examination held on 21.05.2016 ; and vide the Letter dated 23.11.2016, they were declared provisionally qualified for the next stage, i.e. the Aptitude Test. Thereafter, the Applicants had appeared at the Aptitude Test held on 27/28.12.2016 ; and on the basis of the Online Written Examination and the Aptitude Test, vide the Letter dated 27.01.2017, the Respondent No.2 had circulated inter alia for the post of A.S.M. two Lists of roll numbers of candidates deemed to have provisionally qualified for Document Verification – viz. firstly a List including the roll numbers of 38 candidates ; and secondly another List of 50% Extra candidates including the roll numbers of 20 candidates. The roll numbers of both the Applicants in the present O.A. had figured at Sl. No.(7 and 8) respectively of the latter. Vide the Letter dated 31.01.2017 of the Respondent No.2, the names and roll numbers of the candidates as per the aforesaid two Lists had been forwarded – to all the Unit in-charges in the N.W.R., viz., Heads of Departments at Headquarter, Chief Administrative Officer (Construction) Jaipur, Divisional Railway Managers, Chief Workshop Managers and Deputy Chief Materials Managers – for intimation that the Document Verification of the candidates would be done on (15.02.2017, 16.02.2017 and 17.02.2017) ; and to advise those candidates to be in readiness duly. The final Select List/Panel thereafter had been conveyed to the Respondent No.1 purportedly vide Letter dated 27.02.2017.

Subsequently, the office of the Respondent No.1, i.e. the General Manager, N.W.R. Headquarters Jaipur, had written to the Respondent No.2 vide Letter dated 28.08.2017 conveying inter alia – that out of the 38 candidates finally selected/placed on the panel for the 38 vacant posts of A.S.M. (20-UR, 06-SC, 03-ST, 09-OBC) that had been sent vide the Letter dated 27.02.2017, two SC-category candidates could not be appointed as one had not turned up and another was found to be medically unfit ; and that since two SC-posts of A.S.M. could not be filled-up thus, hence a replacement panel in lieu of those two SC-category candidates be provided by the Respondent No.2. In response, Respondent No.2 had conveyed vide the impugned Letter dated 22.09.2017 that no replacement panel could be furnished in lieu of any of the candidates selected through the G.D.C.E. eventually not turning up or being found medically unfit.

Aggrieved by the aforesaid, the Applicants had filed the present O.A. praying for the substantive reliefs - inter alia that impugned Letter dated 22.09.2017 be quashed and set aside ; and further the Respondents be directed to provide the replacement panel ; and even further the Respondents be directed to give appointment on the post of A.S.M. to the Applicants based on the selection process conducted pursuant to the G.D.C.E. Notification No.02/2015 issued on 12.06.2015, along with all consequential service benefits.

It was the case of the Applicants that they had been found successful and qualified in every respect and had found the place in the Waiting List issued by the Respondents, yet their candidature was not being considered at the time of appointment. It was also submitted that the purpose of issuance of the Waiting List was essentially that if there was any shortage due to non-turning up or medical unfitness of any selected candidate, then the persons in the Waiting List be given appointment to fill all the advertised vacancies, purportedly which was not being done by the Respondents. Further, there was no specific bar for providing the replacement panel for the post of A.S.M. as two posts of SC-category remained vacant – hence it was claimed that the Applicants who had been found eligible and were placed on the Reserve/Waiting List should be given appointment against those two vacant SC-category posts of A.S.M.

Vide their reply, Respondents had admitted only to the matters of facts on the record, inter alia – that the R.R.C., N.W.R. had issued the Notification No.02/2015 dated 12.06.2015, for filling up of G.D.C.E. quota vacancies in various posts under N.W.R. ; that the Applicants, who belong to SC-category, had submitted online application forms for the post of A.S.M. for which 38 (20-UR, 06-SC, 03-ST, 09-OBC) vacancies were notified ; that they had appeared at the Online Written Examination held on 21.05.2016 and vide the Letter dated 23.11.2016 were declared provisionally qualified for the next stage i.e. Aptitude Test ; that thereafter, the Applicants appeared at the Aptitude Test held on 27/28.12.2016 and on the basis of the Online Written Examination and the Aptitude Test, vide the Letter dated 27.01.2017, the Respondent No.2 had circulated two Lists of roll numbers of candidates deemed to have provisionally qualified for Document Verification for the post of A.S.M. Also, it had been agreed inter alia – that the first/Main List included roll numbers of 38 candidates and the second/Extra List of 50% Extra candidates included roll numbers of 20 candidates, inter alia of the Applicants at Sl. No.(7 and 8) respectively of the latter ; that vide Letter dated 31.01.2017 of Respondent No.2, names and roll numbers of the candidates as per the aforesaid two Lists had been forwarded to all Unit in-charges in N.W.R. for intimation that the Document Verification of the candidates would be done on (15.02.2017, 16.02.2017 and 17.02.2017) ; and to advise those candidates to be in readiness duly. Moreover, it had also been agreed inter alia – that in due course Office of Respondent No.1 wrote to Respondent No.2 vide Letter dated 28.08.2017 conveying that out of the 38 candidates selected/placed on the panel for the 38 vacant posts of A.S.M. (20-UR, 06-SC, 03-ST, 09-OBC) which had been sent vide the Letter dated 27.02.2017, two SC-category candidates could not be appointed as one had not turned up and another was found to be medically unfit ; that it was also mentioned therein that since two SC-posts of A.S.M. could not be filled up thus, hence a replacement panel in lieu of those two SC-category candidates be provided by Respondent No.2 ; and that Respondent No.2 had conveyed vide the impugned Letter dated 22.09.2017 that no replacement panel could be furnished in lieu of any of the selected candidates selected through the G.D.C.E. not turning up or being found medically unfit.

Per contra, the Respondents had contested the other contentions and grounds cited by the Applicants while seeking their appointment against the 02-SC vacancies of A.S.M.

Regarding the claim of the Applicants to be considered for appointment purportedly as they had been found successful and qualified in every respect and had found place in the Reserve/Waiting List issued – The Respondents had contended that the G.D.C.E.-based recruitment process had contained various stages, wherein candidates were required to sequentially qualify each stage to be eligible for the next stage of the selection process. Thus, the Applicants had appeared at the Online Written Examination and were declared provisionally qualified for the next stage, i.e. the Aptitude Test ; then upon participation in the Aptitude Test, they were assessed to provisionally qualify for the next stage, i.e. the Document Verification. However, mere provisional qualification for the different stages of the selection process as such had not created any right in favour of the Applicants, except to participate in the next stage of selection. It had further been pointed out that based on the Online Written Examination and Aptitude Test, the candidates were called for the Document Verification vide Call-Letter dated 31.01.2017 as per the two Lists enclosed therewith - viz. firstly a Main List including the roll numbers and names of 38 candidates ; and secondly another List of 50% Extra candidates including the roll numbers and names of 20 candidates.

Also, vide the Note in the Call-Letter dated 31.01.2017 itself, it had been conveyed inter alia – that the same was provisional and only intended for presence during Document Verification stage ; that the issuance of the said Call-Letter was not tantamount to the acceptance as correct of the candidates’ applications and other furnished documents/information ; and that the issuance of Call-Letter to a candidate did not imply that he/she was found eligible for the concerned post. It was reiterated thereby that the candidatures continued to be provisional and were liable to be rejected at any stage of the recruitment process.

Accordingly, it was averred that the names of the Applicants had figured in the 20 Extra candidates (50%) prepared as Waiting List of candidates to be called for Document Verification only, which was at an intermediate stage in the overall process ; and mere inclusion of the names of the Applicants therein did not hold them entitled to be appointed against the vacant posts of A.S.M. Moreover, it was averred that the Applicants had not been declared as qualified at the conclusion of overall G.D.C.E.-based selection process, specifically after the Document Verification held from 15.02.2017 to 17.02.2017 ; the final Select List/Panel after which had been conveyed to the Respondent No.1, purportedly vide Letter dated 27.02.2017.

From the examination of the contentions as aforesaid, it had clearly emerged that the issuance of the Letter dated 27.01.2017 and the Call-Letter dated 31.01.2017, each including two Lists – viz. a Main List of candidates and another 50% Extra candidates’ List – was intended specifically for Document Verification. The same was at the stage of a component step in the overall G.D.C.E.-based selection process for the post of A.S.M.

We also noted that although referred to in the pleadings/documents, the copy of the final Select List/Panel dated 27.02.2017 had not been placed on record – either by the Applicants or, by the Respondents. Nonetheless, the issue in the present O.A. had been framed based on the requisition by the Respondent No.1 seeking the names of 02 selected candidates on the Waiting List/Panel against the remainder 02-SC vacancies ; and the consequent claim of the Applicants for their names to be sent as a Replacement Panel. The same would indicate that the names of the Applicant had not been included in the final Select List/Panel dated 27.02.2017 prepared for appointment.

The Letter dated 27.01.2017 based on the Online Written Examination and the Aptitude Test, as well as the Call-Letter dated 31.01.2017 for Document Verification had included the aforesaid two Lists – viz. a Main List of candidates and another 50% Extra candidates’ List – where the roll numbers/names of the Applicants had figured in the latter. But the aforesaid Letter dated 27.01.2017 of Online Written Examination and Aptitude Test and the Call-Letter dated 31.01.2017 for Document Verification were not deemable either as the final Select List/Panel for the vacancies in the post of A.S.M., which had eventually been published on 27.02.2019 later at the conclusion of the overall G.D.C.E. process, specifically after the Document Verification held from 15.02.2017 to 17.02.2017 ; or as the final Waiting Select List/Panel for the vacancies in the post of A.S.M., as the same had not been shown to be prepared after the conclusion of the overall G.D.C.E. process.

Regarding the Applicants’ claim that the Reserve/Waiting List had essentially been issued to ensure that in case of shortage due to non-turning up or medical unfitness of any candidate on the Select List/Panel, all the advertised vacancies be filled-up by appointment from the candidates in the Reserve/Waiting List and that there was no specific bar for providing the replacement panel for the post of A.S.M. – the Respondents had reiterated at the outset that no Reserve/Waiting List had been published on 27.02.2019 at the conclusion of the overall G.D.C.E. process, specifically after the Document Verification held from 15.02.2017 to 17.02.2017. In addition, it was also contended that the Railway Board guidelines vide Letter dated 08/15.12.2015 for replacement panels had clarified that where a common examination was conducted for different categories of vacant posts in different grade pay etc., then no replacement panel can be offered because candidates maintained in Extra List would be those who were at a lower merit than those who may have been placed in a lower grade pay posts. The same was averred to be applicable in the present case also, as the recruitment involved different categories of vacant posts in various grade pays. It was contended that accordingly, there was no question of the Applicants’ names having been placed on any Waiting List/Panel, as no such Waiting List/Panel had been prepared for appointment as A.S.M. after the conclusion of the overall G.D.C.E. process.

From the examination of the contentions as aforesaid, it had clearly emerged that the extant Railway Board guidelines dated 08/15.12.2015 were for not filling-up of posts remaining vacant due to non-joining of the candidates on the final Select List/Panel, by candidates on a Waiting/Extra List/Panel, in cases where a common examination was conducted for different categories of vacant posts in different grade pay etc. Apart from the aforesaid matter being within the remit of the employer concerned, it was found that the same had been decided in a considered manner and for a justifiable reason that no replacement panel can be offered because candidates maintained in Extra List would be those who were at a lower merit than those who may have been placed in a lower grade pay posts. Thus, it did not suffer from any patent illegality or arbitrariness and hence we found that the same was not required to be interfered with.

At the stage of final arguments, the learned Senior Central Government Standing Counsel had cited the authority of the Judgment/ Order dated 19.05.2013 of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the Civil Appeal No. 3062 of 2023 in the case of The State of Karnataka & Ors. Vs. Smt. Bharathi S. [AIR 2023 SC 2792]. While reiterating that in the present O.A., the claim of the Applicants was non-existent as their names had never been included in any Additional or Waiting Selection List/Panel after completion of all the stages of the selection process entirely ; it had been submitted that even in cases where an Additional Waiting List or Panel had been published, the ratio of the Judgment/Order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of The State of Karnataka & Ors. Vs. Smt. Bharathi S. (supra) was clearly that enlistment of name in the Additional List neither creates a right nor a co-relative obligation for appointment. Hence, it was averred by the Respondents that the candidature of the Applicants had not been rejected on any ground after final selection ; but they had in fact failed to find a place in the final Select List/Panel dated 27.02.2017 that had been prepared for appointment at the conclusion of the entire G.D.C.E. process conducted in pursuance of the Notification No.02-2015 ; and after which no Waiting List/Panel had been prepared for appointment against the A.S.M. vacancies. Thus, the Respondents’ impugned actions/communications were based on extant rules/guidelines and there had been no illegality or arbitrariness in the same. The contentions of the Applicants vide the present O.A. were stated to be devoid of any merit ; and hence deserved to be rejected.

Upon adverting to the authority of the Judgment/ Order dated 19.05.2013 of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the Civil Appeal No. 3062 of 2023 in the case of The State of Karnataka & Ors. Vs. Smt. Bharathi S. [AIR 2023 SC 2792] (supra) it emerged that the ratio and position of law as laid down thereby had been brought out inter alia as follows –

From the same, it emerged clearly that even for the Waiting/Additional List prepared after completion of the entire recruitment/selection process, the duty to fill up vacancies from the Additional/Waiting List could arise only on the basis of a mandatory rule. In the case vide the present O.A., it was noted at the outset that the names of the Applicants had not been included in any Additional/Waiting List after completion of the entire selection process – hence the duty to fill-up vacancies that remained due to non-joining of any candidates would not arise per se. Moreover, the Respondents had also relied upon the Railway Board guidelines vide Letter dated 08/15.12.2015 for replacement panels that had clarified that where a common examination was conducted for different categories of vacant posts in different grade pay etc., then no replacement panel can be offered because candidates maintained in Extra List would be those who were at a lower merit than those who may have been placed in a lower grade pay posts.

Thus, apart from it having been shown that no Additional/Waiting List had been compiled after completion of the entire selection process pursuant to G.D.C.E. Notification No.02/2015 ; it was also shown that the extant guidelines had actually been for not filling up of remaining vacancies from the Extra/Waiting List, even if those had existed, in cases where a common examination was conducted for different categories of vacant posts in different grade pay etc. – which had clearly been the case in the GDCE-based selection process pursuant to Notification No.02/2015 relevant to the present O.A.

In the conspectus of all of the foregoing, it had been found that the issuance of the Letter dated 27.01.2017 and of the Call-Letter dated 31.01.2017, each including two Lists – viz. a Main List of candidates and another 50% Extra candidates’ List – were intended specifically for Document Verification as a component stage of the overall G.D.C.E.-based selection process for the post of A.S.M. ; and the inclusion of the roll numbers/names of the Applicant in the latter of those two Lists was not deemable as the final Select List/Panel for filling-up the vacancies in the post of A.S.M., which had eventually been published on 27.02.2019 later for appointment of candidates enlisted therein, at the conclusion of the overall G.D.C.E. process, specifically after the Document Verification held from 15.02.2017 to 17.02.2017.

Also, it had been found that the extant Railway Board guidelines dated 08/15.12.2015 provided for not filling-up of posts remaining vacant due to non-joining of the candidates on the final Select List/Panel, by candidates on a Waiting/Extra List/Panel in cases where a common examination was conducted for different categories of vacant posts in different grade pay etc. The same was a matter within the remit of the employer concerned as well as had been decided in a considered manner and for a justifiable reason and did not suffer from any patent illegality or arbitrariness ; and hence the same was not required to be interfered with.

Even further, it had been found that the names of the Applicants had not been included in any Additional/Waiting List after completion of the entire selection process – hence as per the settled position of law in this regard, no right to be appointed was created for the Applicants since there was no such mandate to fill-up vacancies that remained due to non-joining of certain candidates ; as well as there was no obligation on the State to make appointments ; more so when no final Waiting/Additional List had been prepared and when the extant guidelines did not mandate but instead prohibited the filling-up of the vacancies remaining unfilled after the final Select List/Panel in cases where a common examination was conducted for different categories of vacant posts in different grade pay etc..

Hence, we hold that the claim of the Applicants to be deemed as having been placed on a final Waiting List/Panel after conclusion of the entire selection process, specifically after the Document Verification held from 15.02.2017 to 17.02.2017, was not substantiated factually and was thus untenable.

Therefore, the present Original Application is found to fail on merit and is accordingly dismissed. Pending M.A.s, if any, shall also stand disposed of in accordance. No order as to costs.