Manjunatha N.H. vs The Union Of India & Anr.

Per: Justice S.Sujatha ...........Member(J)

The applicant has filed this original application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 seeking the following reliefs:

Central Administrative Tribunal^{dated 07.08.2024 (Annexure A1); and}

The facts in brief as narrated by the applicant are that the applicant, who was initially appointed as Track Maintainer-IV and presently working as Track Maintainer-II in Level-4 in the Permanent Way Unit of Bengaluru in South Western Railway, is entitled for next avenue in promotion to Track Maintainer-I (TM-I) in Level-5. In terms of the order dated 07.08.2024 issued by the 2^nd Respondent, whenever Track Maintainer-II (TM-II) becomes eligible/considered for promotion as TM-I in Level-5, it is mandatory that TM-II in Level-4 should have performed the duties of Keyman, if he does not perform then he will not become eligible for consideration to promotion as TM-I in Level-5. Since the applicant is working as Keyman in Gang No.5 of the Bengaluru P.Way Unit from 2017 onwards, he becomes eligible for promotion to Track Maintainer Grade-I. His immediate senior Shri Sanaulla Khan has not worked as Keyman and is being utilised in the office of the Senior Section Engineer, as such he is not eligible to be considered for promotion to Track Maintainer Grade-I. Accordingly, the applicant submitted a representation through proper channel on 06.11.2024 requesting to consider him for promotion and the same was forwarded to the 2^nd Respondent by his Branch Officer. Second Respondent issued seniority list of Track Maintainer-II of SSE/P.Way/SBC in Level-4 dated 05.02.2025. As per the said list, the applicant is figuring at Sl.No.4. In the notification issued by the 2^nd Respondent for filling up of the promotional post of Track Maintainer-I of five P.Way Section by viva-voce, the name of Shri Sanaulla Khan has been included though he has not worked as Keyman in the track. There being no action taken by the respondents on the representation dated 06.11.2024 submitted and being aggrieved by the notification dated 23.01.2025 issued by the 2^nd Respondent, the applicant has approached this Tribunal.

Learned Counsel Shri K. Shivakumar representing the applicant submitted that as per the Railway Board’s letter dated 07.08.2024 (Annexure A1), those who have not worked as Keyman are not eligible for promotion as Track Maintainer-I. But in contradiction to their own orders, the name of the employee who has not worked as Keyman and working only in the office of the Senior Section Engineer (UFD) i.e., Shri Sanaulla Khan has been included as eligible and considered for promotion. The applicant, who has been working as Keyman since 2017 and fulfilling the eligibility conditions, has not been considered by the respondents.

Detailed reply statement has been filed on behalf of the respondents. Learned Counsel Smt. P.K. Praneshwari representing the respondents, submitted that vacancies were assessed for promoting employees from Track Maintainer Grade-II to Track Maintainer Grade-I for five different P.Way Units. Two UR vacancies were assessed in SSE/P.WAY/SBC Section. Accordingly, alert list was issued vide letter dated 23.01.2025 alerting the following employees as per seniority and willingness submitted by the employees at the time of processing promotion:

Track Maintainer Grade-II seniority of SSE/PWAY/SBC is as under:

For two UR vacancies assessed for promotion for the post of Track Maintainer Grade-I in Grade Pay Rs.2800/-, the first employee who is coming under the zone of consideration for TM-I promotion is Smt.R.Netravathi. Since the said employee had given unwillingness for promotion the next two employees, Shri Sri Ramaiah and Shri Sanaulla Khan, as per seniority were called for attending viva-voce. A three member selection committee shall adjudge the suitability of the employees appearing in the viva-voce for selection to Track Maintainer-I. Any employee who is coming up for Track Maintainer-I selection but not worked as Keyman shall not be considered suitable for promotion. Out of the two employees who have attended the viva-voce on 23.12.2025 for Track Maintainer-I selection, only one employee i.e., Shri Sri Ramaiah was found suitable for promotion to Track Maintainer Grade-I by the duly constituted screening committee. Accordingly, the said employee was promoted as TM-I vide office order dated 31.12.2025 whereas Shri Sanaulla Khan was not considered suitable by the duly constituted screening committee. The applicant being at Sl.No.4 in the seniority list published on 05.02.2025 and Shri Sanaulla Khan who was at Sl.No.3 though considered for selection, he was not found suitable for promotion by the selection committee having not worked as Keyman. The applicant being suitable for promotion as TM-I in the next selection i.e., viva-voce conducted on 15.04.2026, was recommended for empanelment for promotion by the selection committee vide Memorandum dated 22.05.2026 along with the other suitable candidates, wherein he is at Sl.No.1. Pursuant to which, office order dated 17.06.2026 has been issued promoting the suitable candidates duly recommended by the selection committee to the post of Track Maintainer-I of Civil Engineering Department of SBC Division in Level-5 of 7^th CPC. In the said list, the applicant is at Sl.No.1. Hence seeks for dismissal of OA.

We have carefully considered the submissions of the learned Counsel appearing for the parties and perused the material on record.

The points that arise for our consideration are:

Since both the points are inter-related, the same are considered together. It is not in dispute that in terms of Para-167 of IRPW Manual, the selection of Gangman to perform the duties of a Keyman is to be considered as a step in his training as Mate. CTE/SWR/UBL has issued a Circular vide letter dated 19.04.2023. The same reads thus:

Subsequently instructions have been issued by the Senior DPO/SBC dated 07.08.2024, further referring to Para-167 IRPW Manual and the Circular dated 19.04.2023 issued by CTE/SWR/UBL in this regard for strict compliance and adherence. The relevant para of the instructions issued by the Senior DPO/SBC dated 07.08.2024 reads thus:

Coming to the facts of the case, vacancies were assessed for promoting employees from Track Maintainer Grade-II to Track Maintainer Grade-I for five different P.Way units. Two UR vacancies were assessed in SSE/SBC Section. As per RBE 111/2014 dated 14.10.2014, the post of Track Maintainer Grade-I has to be filled as per instructions dated 13.08.2013, with a slight deviation that instead of Trade Test, Viva Voce may be resorted to.

It is true that Shri Sanaulla Khan is above the applicant in the seniority list of Track Maintainer-II/Track Maintainers/ SSE/PWAY/SBC in Level-5, the feeder post for promotion to the post of Track Maintainer Grade-I. The applicant is figuring at Sl.No.4 and Shri Sanaulla Khan at Sl.No.3. To consider the candidates for zone of consideration both seniority and eligibility requires to be fulfilled. Indisputedly, Shri Sanaulla Khan, the immediate senior of the applicant has not worked as Keyman and is being utilised in the office of the Senior Section Engineer (Ultrasonic Flaw Detection), whereas the applicant is working as Keyman in Gang No.5 of the Bengaluru P.Way unit from 2017 onwards. With reference to the Railway letter dated 22.09.2014 and further Corrigendum issued by CTE/SWR/UBL dated 19.04.2023 as well as the instructions issued by Senior DPO/SBC letter dated 07.08.2024, it is mandatory that Track Maintainer-II in Level-4 should perform the duties of Keyman to become eligible/consideration for promotion as Track Maintainer-I in Level-5, if he does not perform then he will not become eligible for consideration for promotion as Track Maintainer-I in Level-5. This eligibility specifically speaks for consideration to promotion as Track Maintainer-I in Level-5. Merely on the basis of the seniority, no candidate would have been considered for promotion. Had Shri Sanaulla Khan (indisputedly not being eligible), was not considered, the immediate junior, the applicant herein would have been coming under the zone of consideration during 23.01.2025, when the office letter dated 23.01.2025 was issued alerting the employees for processing promotion. It is the specific case of the respondents that the employees Shri Sri Ramaiah and Shri Sanaulla Khan were called for attending viva voce and the screening committee having found Shri Sanaulla Khan not eligible since he has not worked as Keyman, did not select him. This action of the respondents has resulted in pushing the eligible candidate to the subsequent selection. Subsequent selection of the applicant vide office order dated 17.06.2026 on the recommendations of the selection committee issued vide Memorandum dated 22.05.2026 would not resolve the claim of the applicant for consideration of his promotion as on 23.01.2025.

In the circumstances, it was mandatory to consider the applicant having both seniority and eligibility when Shri Sanaulla Khan was not fulfilling the eligibility. Amongst the two posts available for Track Maintainer-I in SSE/PWAY/SBC Section, one post remained vacant affecting the rights of the eligible candidate, if the applicant was considered, he would have been promoted. The defence taken by the respondents administration that seniority alone was the criteria for zone of consideration, is wholly erroneous and prevented the legally entitled candidate – applicant herein, to get the promotion at an appropriate time.

For the reasons stated herein above, the impugned order dated 23.01.2025-list of Track Maintainer-II to be called for viva voce, with respect to Shri Sanaulla Khan, Track Maintainer-II SBC/UR cannot be approved. Hence, we direct the respondents authorities to consider the applicant for promotion in place of Shri Sanaulla Khan, having fulfilled the conditions stipulated in Annexure A1 dated 07.08.2024. Since the applicant was considered in the subsequent viva voce and has been promoted vide order dated 17.06.2026 pursuant to the recommendation of the selection committee, revised order shall be issued to include the applicant in the selection panel dated 30.12.2025 (Annexure R2). Compliance shall be made in an expedite manner, in any event not later than eight weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order.

OA stands disposed of in terms of above.

No order as to costs.