1. Challenge to railway notification for one post as not reserved for PwBD under Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 and RBE No. 97/2022. (Para 1 , 2 )
Back
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Pramod Kumar Das, M
Disabled Employees Association of E.Co.Rly. – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
OA No. 117 of 2023
1. Challenge to railway notification for one post as not reserved for PwBD under Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 and RBE No. 97/2022. (Para 1 , 2 )
2. Applicants argued post should be reserved for PwBD per 100-point roster; respondents argued single vacancy treated as unreserved. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 )
3. Notification quashed, appointment void ab initio, directed to fill post by PwBD (locomotor disability) within 180 days. (Para 17 , 18 )
Yes, reservation is applied on total sanctioned strength; a single vacancy falling at point 1 of 100-point roster must be reserved for PwBD. (Para 13 , 14 , 16 , 17 )
No, the respondents failed to follow the 100-point roster and did not exercise discretion to interchange PwBD categories, making the notification contrary to law. (Para 14 , 16 , 17 )
Every government establishment must maintain a separate 100-point vacancy-based reservation roster for PwBD in promotion, with points 1, 26, 51, 76 earmarked for PwBD categories. (Para 9 , 10 , 13 , 16 )
PRAMOD KUMAR DAS, MEMBER (A):
1.The gist of the matter is that the respondents-railway issued Notification dated 23.11.2022 inviting application for holding departmental examination among the eligible employees for formation of Group-B/Personnel panel for 01 (one) UR post of APO/AWO against 70% selection though CBT for the assessment period 2023-24 in Personnel Department of E.Co.Rly. Against such notification, the Zonal President and Zonal Secretary submitted applications dated 04.01.2023, 25.01.2023 and 27.02.2023 to PCPO, E.Co.Rly., BBSR stating that as per the RBE No. 97/2022, in terms of 100 point vacancy based reservation roster, the said post ought to have been reserved for PwBD category instead of UR. Alleging no action on the said representations, this OA has been filed by the Disabled Employees Association of E.Co.Rly. represented by Secretary K.Khetrabasi along with 09 (nine) office bearers of the said Association on 12/13.03.2023 but without disclosing the identity of the post held by them inter alia praying to quash the Notification dated 23.11.2022 and, as a consequence, to direct the respondents to issue fresh Notification reserving the post meant for PwBD candidates in compliance to RBE No. 97/2022. This OA was admitted on 15.03.2023 giving opportunity to the respondents to file their reply both to the merit of the matter as also to the interim relief. During pendency of the OA, the respondent-railway held the examination and empanelled one Sri Penta Radhakrishna vide memorandum No. ECoR/Pers/Gaz/APO-70%/Panel/23-24 dated 26.04.2023.
2. It is the case of the applicant that as per Section 34 of the Rights of Person with Disability Act, 2016 and the law, the DoP&T issued OM dated 17.05.2022 relating to grant of reservation in promotion to PwBDs in Post and Services of the Central Govt. The Railway Board vide RBE No. 97/2022 issued instruction to all concerned to follow the DoP&T OM dated 17.05.2022 mutatis mutandis regarding grant of reservation to PwBD in promotion from Group-C to Group-B. As per the reservation policy, the first post is reserved for PWBD candidate. The notification dated 23.11.2022 issued by the respondents inviting application for drawing a panel for 01 (one) post of APO/AWO being the first notification after the RBE No. 97/2022, the said post ought to have been reserved for PwBD instead of UR. Therefore, the action of the respondent-railways in reserving the said post of UR candidate de hors the RBE No. 97/2022 issued on 18.08.2022, the notification is liable to be quashed.
3. Respondents filed their counter objecting and contesting the case of the applicant by stating that the provision of reservation of PwBD in promotion from Group-C to Group-B post came into effect vide DoP&T OM dated 17.05.2022, which OM was directed to be adopted in Railway vide RBE No. 97/2022. The respondents furnished the vacancy position for last 10 years in the post of APO (Group-B) of which the percentage of reservation for PwWBD as under:
4. According to the respondents, the vacancy of APO/AWO for the year 2023-24 was assessed as 01 (UR) in accordance with para 2 of RBE 58/2001. Therefore, no reservation was allocated in favour of PwBD candidates. However, subsequently notification was issued on 04.01.2024 for drawing panel of 02(two) posts of APO/AWO as special drive against vacancy cycle 2023-24 of which one was reserved for PwBD of Blindness and Low Vision category as per RBE 97/2022. Thus, the allegation of the association that there was violation of the provision of DoPT/RBE No. 97/2022 is not correct. It is also stated that the action taken by them is in accordance with the provision of the RBE No. 58/2001 in which it is provided that in the case of Group-B(Class-II) and lowest rank of Group-A(Class-I) where reservation rules are applicable, if a single vacancy occurs against reservation roster point post in a recruitment/promotion year, the said vacancy shall be treated as unreserved. According to them, they ma
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top