Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 12357
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
MS. RANJANA SHAHI, MEMBER (J), SHRI LOK RANJAN, MEMBER (A)
MANOHAR LAL SINGH – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 199/2016
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Shri C.B. Sharma
For the Respondents: Shri L.M. Bhardwaj, Shri Anupam Agarwal
The assessment for promotion shall strictly follow the statutory provisions, with pro-rata scaling for Professional Ability and permissible record of service evaluation.
Headnote:(A) Promotion - Assessment for Professional Ability - Pro-rata scaling of marks derived from written examination relative to maximum marks for Professional Ability is mandated by Railway Board's guidelines. Assessment was made in accordance with statutory provisions. (Paras 11, 12, 17)
(B) Selection Procedure - Applicant challenged the Answer-Key and scaling post-selection; refusal to allow this challenge upheld, due to delay in raising concerns. (Paras 14, 17)
(C) Candidate's Service Record - Tribunal upheld consideration of most recent three years' performance evaluations, dismissing claims for earlier evaluations. (Paras 16, 17)
Facts of the case:
Applicant contested non-inclusion in selection panel for Loco Inspector post despite higher written scores. Selection criteria based on pro-rata scaling of examination marks and record of service evaluations.
Findings of Court:
Impugned actions were found to comply with statutory provisions and without infirmity.
Issues: Whether the scaling of marks and selection criteria adhered to statutory guidelines; whether the applicant could challenge the process post-selection.
Ratio Decidendi: The Tribunal ruled the procedural adherence as per the governing rules, rendering the Applicant's challenges unsustainable.
Result: Present O.A. is dismissed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to selection panel due to dissatisfaction with scoring. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. challenges raised post-result not permissible. (Para 8 , 14 , 15) |
| 3. assessment compliance with statutory guidelines upheld. (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 4. tribunal found no basis to overturn selection process. (Para 17) |
| 5. o.a. dismissed; no costs awarded. (Para 18 , 19) |
ORDER
Per : Hon’ble Shri Lok Ranjan, Member (A)
The present O.A. had been filed by the Applicant who had been aggrieved by the preparation of the panel for selection to the post of Loco Inspector(Electrical) [L.I.(E)] in Pay Band of Rs.(9300- 34800)/- with Grade Pay Rs.4600/- in the Mechanical(Running)Departmentunder Kota Division of Western Central Railway (W.C.R.) despite his having obtained higher marks in the written examination part,but due to being awarded lesser marksfor the ‘Record of Service’.
2. Based on the pleadings of the parties, the relevant matrix of the facts had emerged to be as follows, briefly. The Applicant was appointed in Railway, the RespondentOrganization, as Assistant Loco Pilot (A.L.P.) in 1995 ; and was promoted as Loco Pilot (Goods) on 08.04.1999 and thereafter as Loco Pilot (Passenger) on 12.04.2012. Subsequently, in response to notification dated 07.04.2014 issued by the Office of the Divisional Railway Manager (D.R.M.) for filling up of 04 posts (OC-03, SC-01), the Applicant had applied for the post of L.I.(E), Mechanical(Running) Department, Kota Division, W.C.R. After the written examination for the same conducted on various dates in February-2015 and the supplementary examination conducted on 15.03.2015, the result of the written examination was declared on 03.06.2015, listing the names of officials who had qualified there-at.
3. Later, the duly constituted Selection Board forthe post of L.I.(E) under Mechanical(Running) Department, Kota Division had met on 10.11.2015 to compile the overall assessment of the candidates –including that on ‘Professional Ability’assessed for Maximum 50 marks, on the basis of marks obtained separately at the written examination ; and on ‘Record of Service’ assessed for Maximum 30 marks, based on the Confidential Reports (C.R.s) for the 03 years (from 2011-12 to 2013-14). Since the written examination had been conducted previously with Maximum Marks 100, whereas the prescribed Maximum Marks for ‘Professional Ability’ were 50 – the gross marks obtained by the candidates at the written examination had been reduced pro-rata (i.e. halved) by the said Selection Board for deriving their assessment of ‘Professional Ability’ of candidates. Moreover, the official Respondents had considered the C.R.s for the 03 years (from 2011-12 to 2013-14) with Maximum 10 marks for each year, with +0.5 marks for any award or –0.5 marks for any penaltyduring those years, subject to a maximum of 30 marks in total for ‘Record of Service’. Eventually, the provisional panel was prepared by the Selection Board on 10.11.2015 for the 04 vacant posts [03-OC and 01-ST], based on the aggregate Maximum 80 marks (i.e. ‘Professional Ability’ -50, ‘Record of Service’ -30) accordingly ; and the Applicant had not been placedin that panel.
4. Aggrieved by the same, the Applicant had sought several substantive reliefs inter alia, – that official Respondents be directed to interpolate name of the Applicant in panel dated 10.11.2015 to the cadre of L.I.(E), Mechanical (Running) Department in Kota Division by deleting name of private Respondent No.4 and thus modifying panel dated 10.11.2015 and further to give posting to the Applicant by quashing posting of private Respondent No.4 with the subsequent orders passed by the official Respondents with all consequential benefits ; that the instructions of official Respondents which provide to take into consideration 50% marks awarded in written examination for assessment be quashed and set aside with direction to official Respondents to prepare a revised panel taking into account the total marks obtained
