AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Hon’ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J):
The present Review Application has been filed by the Applicants seeking review/recall of the order dated 09.07.2026 passed in OA No. 1286/2024, whereby the OA was dismissed. The Applicants rely upon the Northern Railway letter dated 04.04.2024 and notice dated 03.04.2024 as newly discovered documents, contending that Sh. Chandra Prakash and Sh. Purushottam Thapa, employees of the same Catering Unit, were promoted as Chief Catering Inspectors with effect from 03.04.2024, despite the Respondents' stand that the Catering Unit had been declared redundant and its posts surrendered by 2021. It is submitted that the said documents establish that promotional avenues continued to exist and that material facts were suppressed before the Tribunal.
We have considered the grounds urged and the documents relied upon. The order under review had dismissed the OA after recording that the Catering Unit was a peripheral/non-core function, that the Railways had taken a policy decision for rationalisation of manpower and had contracted out the services, and that the surrendered posts could not be revived by judicial direction. It was also noticed that the Applicants had already been granted the benefit of MACP and that no promotional posts remained available.
The subsequent promotion of two employees as Chief Catering Inspectors, by itself, does not establish that they were promoted against the very posts which had been surrendered in 2021 or that those posts continued to form part of the Applicants' promotional cadre. In the absence of clear material establishing the identity of the posts or deliberate suppression of such material facts by the Respondents, the allegation of fraud or misrepresentation cannot be accepted. The decision in S.P. Chengalvaraya Naidu v. Jagannath, (1994) 1 SCC 1, therefore, does not warrant recall of the order.
The plea of parity with Sh. Purushottam Thapa and the reliance on subsequent promotions would require examination of the cadre structure, sanctioned strength and the Railway's policy, and would amount to reconsideration of the merits of the OA. Such an exercise is beyond the limited scope of review jurisdiction. No error apparent on the face of the record has been demonstrated.
Accordingly, no sufficient ground for review or recall of the order dated 09.07.2026 is made out. The Review Application is dismissed. Pending MAs, if any, shall also stand disposed of. No order as to costs.