The court ruled that the applicant's claims for regularization were unsubstantiated due to the lack of authentic documentation, despite eligibility under the Railway regularization scheme.

ORDER

Per: Sangam Narain Srivastava, Member (A)

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

“8.a This Hon’ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to call for the records of the case from the respondents and after examining the same quash and set aside the impugned orders dated 19.11.1999 dated 03.06.2010.

8.b This Hon’ble Tribunal may further be pleased to direct the respondents to screen the applicant and, if found fit, to regularize his services with all consequential benefits.

8.c Costs of the application be provided for.

8.d Any other and further order as this Hon’ble Tribunal deems fit in the nature and circumstances of the case be passed.”

2. Facts as submitted by the applicant is that the applicant belongs to the Other Backward Classes (OBC) category and the educational qualification of the applicant is (Secondary School Certificate). The applicant was initially engaged as Casual Labour on 03rd February, 1991 under the Section Engineer, Burhanpur Unit, Bhusawal Division. Thereafter, the applicant worked as a gangman under various authorities until 18th August, 1996. The applicant put in 188 days of casual service. The applicant’s name appears on the Casual Labour live register maintained by IOW (B&F) Bhusawal in L/R No. 1991/4 at Sr. No. 203.

2.2 It is submitted that by order dated 18th May, 1999 (Annexure A-5), the Railway Board framed a scheme for regularization of casual labourers. Under that scheme casual labourers borne on live registers and supplementary live registers were to be regularized after screening. The conditions for regularization were prescribed and have been relaxed from time to time and now a Casual Labourer has to fulfill the following conditions for claiming regularization:

(a) 120 days of casual service;

(b) Name borne on the Live Register;

(c) Educational Qualification of 8th Standard Pass (now relaxed to ‘literate’ for regularization as Gangman the relevant post); and

(d) upper age limit of 40 years for General, 43 years for OBC and 45 years for SC/ST.

2.3 The applicant submitted his application for regularization in the prescribed proforma to Respondent No. 2 on 18th June, 1999 (Annexure A-6). Initially, Respondent No. 2 regularized only 26 casual labourers who were below 33 years of age and had put in more than three years of casual service and were eighth-standard pass; the applicant’s case was not considered then because he had not completed three years’ casual service. After issuance of the Railway Board order dated 20th September, 2001 (Annexure A-7), the applicant became eligible for regularization. Thereafter, Respondent No. 2 sent the casual labourer cards for verification to the respective depots.

2.4On verification Respondent No. 2 prepared two lists: (i) casual labourers whose service, on verification, exceeded 120 days; and (ii) those whose service was found to be less than 120 days. By letter No. BSL/P/531/EBW/RCL dated 24th October, 2002 the two lists were forwarded to Respondent No.1. The respondents regularized 126 casual labourers in June 2003 (Annexure A-8). When the applicant enquired, he was informed that his name did not appear on any of the lists. Enquiries made in the office of Respondent No. 2 did not elicit a response at the time. The applicant, therefore, submitted a representation dated 20th January, 2004 for regularization (acknowledged by Respondent No. 2 — An- nexure A-9).

2.5 It is stated that the applicant continued to press for consideration and submitted further representations through the Section Engineer, Burhanpur dated 13th May, 2005 (Annexur