CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL CUOT.AT.NAoC. K2 6B0E/N0 0C2H9, 2C oUfT 2T0A2C5K CORAM:

Reserved on 13.10.2025 Pronounced on 22.1 0.2025 THE HON’BLE SHRI SUDHI RANJAN MISHRA, MEMBER (J)

THE HON’BLE SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR DAS, MEMBER (A)

Gottapu Appala Naidu, aged about 43 years, S/o. Atchanna, at present working as Sr. Clerk under Senior Section Engineer (Engineering) Bobbili (VBL) under Waltiar Division, East Coast Railway, VISAKHAPATNAM, PIN:

530016.

……Applicant VERSUS

1. Union of India, represented through the General Manager, East Coast Railway, Rail Bhawan, Bhubaneswar, Dist.-KHORDHA:

751017.

2. Divisional Railway Personnel Manager, Waltiar, East Coast Railway, VISHAKHAPATNAM, PIN:

530016.

3. Senior Divisional Personnel Officer, Waltiar, East Coast Railway, VISHAKHAPATNAM, PIN:

530016.

4. Assistant Personnel Officer, Waltier Division, East Coast Railway, VISHAKHAPATNAM, PIN:

530016.

5. D.V.Appa Rao, Assistant Personnel Officer-II, Waltiar Division, East Coast Railway, VISHAKHAPATNAM, PIN: 530016.

……Respondents For the applicant : Ms. Saswati Mohapatra, Counsel For the respondents : Mr. J.K.Nayak, Counsel O R D E R PRAMOD KUMAR DAS, MEMBER (A):

Admittedly, the applicant was initially appointed as Jr.

Trackman in Pay Band-I (Rs. 5200-20,200/- with GP Rs. 1800/-). However, while working as Track Maintainer Gr.IV in PMPL-I, he became medically incapacitated and while sending him for medical screening, his designation was inadvertently stated as Track Maintainer Gr. III in Pay Matrix-2. Though, he was in fact, was working as Track Maintainer Gr.IV in PMPL-I, he submitted application stating to have been continuing as Track Maintainer- III requesting for alternative appointment in nearby Railway Hospital. The authority concerned taking into consideration the assertion of the applicant that he has been continuing as Track Maintainer-III, recommended for his alternative appointment as Carpenter Gr.III in PMPL-II vide order dated 06.08.2018 and posted him at RGDA. Being not satisfied of such posting, he submitted application on 01.08.2018 requesting his posting as Jr. Clerk/PMPL-2 since he was working as Track Maintainer-III and, after rescreening, he was provided the alternative appointment as Jr. Clerk in PMPL-2 vide order dated 03.10.2018 and, based on the seniority position in the post of Jr. Clerk, he was promoted to Sr. Clerk in PMPL-5 vide order dated 12.10.2022. The respondents department issued notification dated 27.05.2024 for holding LDCE for the post of OS. While scrutinizing the applications, it was noticed that his alternative appointment to the post of Jr. Clerk was erroneous being de hors the rules since the post of Jr. Clerk is not the equivalent post of Track Maintainer-IV.

2. A show cause notice was issued to the applicant on 27.05.2025 giving him opportunity to state as to why he should not be reverted top Level-I which is his correct substantive pay level at the time of medical decategorizationa bb iyn ictaioncelling the earlier alternative appointment which was erroneous one.

3. The applicant submitted his reply on 03.06.2025 without controverting the fact that he was continuing as Track Maintainer Gr.IV in PMPL-I when he was medically decategorized and, that, the alternative appointment provided to him to the post of Jr. Clerk and subsequent promotion to Sr. Clerk was erroneous and de hors the rules. However, it has been stated that he has been discharged his duties in the alternative post provided to him efficiently and meritoriously over a period of seven years and, that, he was not at fault for such alternative appointment to the post of Jr. Clerk and, therefore, justice cannot be sacrificed on technicality. It has been stated that even if it is assumed that there was mistake on the part of the department yet he should not be made to suffer after serving for seven years thereby unsettling and forfeiting his hard-earned promotion to higher grades. The respondents ought not to have alter his promotion/appointment at their whims