Prakash Kumar vs Union Of India & Ors.

PRAMOD KUMAR DAS, MEMBER (A):

The applicant has filed this OA praying to quash the letter dated 12.11.2021 rejecting his representation dated 10.06.2021 and to direct the respondents to appoint him to the post of Technician Gr.III as per Centralized Employment Notice No. 01/2014 dated 18.01.2014. The case of the applicant is that he competed at the selection process, and, after written examination, he was called upon to appear for certificate verification vide letter dated 04.08.2015. It is averred by Ld. Counsel for the applicant that Office of Resp. No.3 on 27.10.2016 had issued part panels for appointment of candidates in the post of ALP and Technician Gr. III and, again three more part panels were issued on 19.06.2018, 21.06.2018 and 28.11.2018. Vide RTI information dated 18.05.2018, he was intimated that his name was in the standby list. On 10.06.2021, he preferred representation to Resp. No.3 praying for issuance of appointment order in his favour, which has been turned down vide letter dated 12.11.2021. Being aggrieved, he has filed the instant OA with the prayers as aforesaid.

Respondents filed their counter contesting and opposing the case of the applicant, to which the applicant filed rejoinder. Respondents also filed reply to rejoinder.

The sum and substance of respondents argument is that Centralised Employment Notice No. 01/2014 was issued on 18.01.2014 by Railway Recruitment Board inviting applications from eligible candidates for filling up the posts of Assistant Loco Pilot and Technicians. As per the selection procedures and terms and conditions, based on the rules and policy decisions issued by Railway Board, the candidates must carefully indicate their category wise, post wise and Railway/PU wise preferences in the application. Applicant was one of the OBC candidates against such Notification under Railway Recruitment Board, Bhubaneswar and had preferred for the posts under Category No. 1, 2, 3, 62, 132, 133, 135, 136 & 137. He appeared in the written examination on 13.07.2014 and secured 69.53% of marks thereof. As per notification (Para No. 7.05 of CEN-01/2014), one has to qualify in Written Examination for his selection in Technicians posts and for selection to the post of Assistant Loco Pilot, he has to qualify both in written Examination as well as in Aptitude test. Having found suitable in the written examination, he was allowed to appear for Aptitude Test on 17.12.2014. Since, the applicant failed in the Aptitude Test, he was not eligible for selection to the post of Asst. Loco Pilot. However, based on his written examination marks, although he was eligible for selection to the post of Technician but due to lower percentage of marks secured by him in written Examination, he was placed in the standby list along with other candidates. As per the provision of Centralised Employment Notification No. CEN-01/2014, all standby candidates were provisionally shortlisted for verification of their Documents/certificates & genuineness of candidature along with main list candidates. His documents/certificates were verified on 11.09.2015 and the same were found genuine. He was placed in the common pool of standby list, along with 674 candidates, keeping his candidature alive for future use, if required, against Technician posts only. After verification of documents of all the shortlisted candidates, panels were prepared from main list for the posts of Assistant Loco Pilots and Technicians against the notified vacancies for submission to Zonal Railway. After empanelment of all the eligible candidates against the notified vacancies, there was further requirement of candidates by Zonal Railways against the accrual vacant posts in Railways. Hence, some of the candidates available in standby list were considered for empanelment against the said vacancies and, subsequently, 653 candidates, from the common list of 674 standby candidates, were empanelled for the post of Assistant Loco Pilots and Technicians through various panels from time to time. The Principal Chief Personnel Officer/ECOR/Bhubaneswar vide letter dated 15.11.2018 had submitted indents for two OBC vacancies (OH) for providing diversion panel of two candidates for induction in the post of Telecom Maintainer Gr.III (Cat.3). Although, the applicant belonged to OBC community, he could not be considered against the above post for his marks, i.e. 69.53% which is below cut off mark for OBC community (90.62%). Two OH candidates belonging to OBC community in the standby list having marks above or equal to cut off marks in PWD(OH) community, were recommended for empanelment vide panel dtd. 28.11.2018. After 28.11.2018, no further panels were sought by the zonal Railway and the currency of panel against CEN-01/2014 finally expired on 30.04.2019 with 21 standby candidates, including the applicant. Hence, there being no violation of any statutory rules, respondents prayed for dismissal of this OA.

Taking into account the submissions of the respondents and after cursorily going through the pleadings, we do not find either any piece of evidence or any justifiable ground to accept that despite having scored lower marks the applicant is entitled to be appointed against the post of Technician Gr.III as per Centralized Employment Notice No. 01/2014 dated 18.01.2014. There is also no pleading to the effect that respondents in any manner violated any such rules or guidelines in the process of selection and appointment to the post in question. In the circumstances, we find no ground to interfere in the impugned orders. Accordingly, the OA being devoid of any merit is dismissed. Pending MA, if any, stands dismissed. Costs made easy.