SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 8921

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCH, BENGALURU ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.170/00274/2022 DATED THIS THE 14th DAY OF MARCH, 2024 CORAM:

HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE S. SUJATHA, MEMBER (J)

HON’BLE SHRI RAKESH KUMAR GUPTA, MEMBER (A)

Mustakali Nadaf, S/o Shri Maktumsab, Aged about 31 years, Residing at H. No.241, Near Kusugal Railway Station, Kusugal-580 033, Dharwad. .Applicant.

(By Advocate Shri B.S. Venkatesh Kumar)

Vs.

1. Union of India represented by The General Manager, South Western Railway, Headquarters Office, Rail Soudha, Gadag Road, Hubballi - 580 020

2. The Principal Chief Personnel Officer, South Western Railway, Hubballi Division, Gadag Road, Rail Soudha, Hubballi – 580020 ….Respondents (By Shri Vishnu Bhat, Sr. Panel Counsel)

O R D E R (ORAL)

PER: RAKESH KUMAR GUPTA, MEMBER (A)

1. The applicant has filed the present Original Application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 seeking the following reliefs:

a) To issue a direction to the respondents to immediately take action to appoint the applicant as the substitute bungalow peon to the Principal Chief Manager, S.W. Railway, more particularly because the General Manager has already approved his case, b) Grant such other relief/s as this Tribunal deems fit to grant to the applicant in the circumstances of the case including an order as to costs of this OA.

2. The facts of the case as pleaded by the applicant in his pleadings, are as follows:

a) The applicant is an unemployed person. He submitted an application dated 24.07.2020 (Annexure-A1) for the post of Substitute Bungalow Peon. The Principal Chief Operation Manager, South Western Railway, Hubballi, sponsored the applicant for engaging him as Substitute Bungalow Peon.

b) On 06.10.2020, the aforesaid Principal Chief Operating Manager wrote a letter to the 2nd Respondent intimating the latter that he is not having Bungalow Peon as the incumbent remained unauthorizedly absent and the said person has been terminated. He further stated that a fresh application was also moved to appoint a new person and the same was sanctioned by the first respondent. However, the applicant whom the officer wanted to engage as Bungalow Peon, could not be sent for medical examination due to a Railway Board’s letter. The Principal Chief Operation Manager, therefore, requested that as the post of Bungalow Peon has already been sanctioned, the applicant may be sent for medical examination.

c) On 08.10.2020, the second Respondent addressed a letter to the applicant proposing to engage him as Substitute Bungalow Peon and attaching him to work as the Bungalow Peon of Chief Principal Operating Manager and that the applicant is required to pay Rs.24/- towards medical examination fee. One of the stipulations at para No.3 of letter dated 08.10.2020 (Annexure A-4) was that the applicant can be considered for absorption against erstwhile Group D post after 3 years continuous service from the date of initial engagement. The applicant has paid the said medical examination fee.

d) The applicant was not given appointment even after lapse of a considerable time. Therefore, the Principal Chief Operating Manager submitted a note dated 14.01.2022 (Annexure-A6) to the first Respondent. In this note, the PCOM stated that the appointment of the applicant was approved. While approving the case on 08.10.2020, it was stated that the candidate viz., the applicant herein has already come to know that his case has been processed and not giving him the job will be a breach of trust and it involves the credibility of the post of General Manager, South Western Railway. The Officer further stated that even though the applicant had already deposited the medical examination fee, he was not sent for the medical examination and on inquiry from Smt. Vijaya, Secretary to the General Manager, it was informed that they had kept the medical examination pending awaiting certain clarifications from Western Railway.

e) A DO letter was sent by the second Respondent to the Railway Board on 21.01.2021 and the Railway Board has sent a reply on 05.04.2021 (Annexure-A7). The Railway Board informed the respondents that in regard to the clarifications sought, instructions had already been issued vide its letter dated 06.08.2020 (Annexure-A8) and 01.12.2020 (Annexure-A9) and the same may be followed. As can be seen from these annexures, the subject related to the policy of appointment of Telephone Attendant cum Dak Khalasis (TADK) and the said clarifications did not cover the posts of Bungalow Peons. The second Respondent addressed a letter to the Principal Chief Operations Manager on 06.05.2022 (Annexure-A10) in reply to the latter’s letter dated 14.01.2022. In this letter it is averred that the second Respon

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top