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

2026 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 733

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Atul Rao – Appellant
Versus
Railway Board – Respondent
O.A./1053/2023



(Reserved on 19.01.2026)

Central Administrative Tribunal, Allahabad Bench, Allahabad Original Application NO. 330/01053/2023 This the 21 st day of January, 2026.

Present Hon’ble Mr. Justice Om Prakash VII, Member (J)

Hon’ble Mr. Mohan Pyare, Member (A)

Atul Rao son of Dhirendra Rao, resident of Village and Post Nagwa Khas, Rudrapur, District Deoria.

………..Applicant By Advocate: Sri Vishnu Shankar Gupta/Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh Versus

1. Union of India through its Secretary, Ministry of Railway, Govt.

of India, New Delhi.

2. Railway Recruitment Board, Allahabad through its Chairman.

3. Divisional Personnel Officer, North Central Railway, Prayagraj.

Respondents By Advocate: Ms. Shikha Dixit

ORDER

By Hon’ble Mr. Justice Om Prakash-VII, Member (J)

The present Original Application has been filed by the applicant under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 for the following reliefs:-

“(i) The Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to quash the impugned order dated 20.11.2023 passed by respondent No.3 (Annexure No. A-1);

(ii) The Hon’ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to command to the respondents to sent the applicant for training for the post of Senior MANISH KUMAR Commercial-cum-Ticket Clerk for next batch and further direct to the

respondents to not filled the aforesaid post in which the applicant has

been finally selected by the other candidates.

(iii) The Hon’ble Tribunal may further graciously be pleased to issue any

other suitable order or direction which this Hon’ble Court finds deem

fit and proper.

(iv) Award the cost”.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the respondents issued a notification on 28.02.2019 for various railway posts. The applicant appeared in the examination conducted by the Railway Recruitment Board, Allahabad, and cleared all stages of examinations. He was finally selected for the post of Senior Commercial-cum-Ticket Clerk (NTPC Level-5). Meanwhile, on 21.03.2019, a false FIR was lodged against the applicant and his family members under under sections 147, 323, 504 and 506 of IPC. A cross-FIR was also lodged against the complainant under sections 325,323, 504 & 506 IPC. Charge-sheets were filed in both cases. When the training was to be conducted, the applicant requested the respondents to send him for the next training batch starting on 15.11.2023. As he was not allowed to join the training, he filed Original Application No. 905/2023. The said application was disposed of vide order dated 20.10.2023 with a direction to the respondents to consider his case. Thereafter, the respondents decided his representation by order dated 20.11.2023.

This order is under challenge in the present Original Application.

3. The respondents stated in the counter affidavit that the respondents issued a notification on 28.02.2019 for various NTPC posts. The applicant appeared in the examination conducted by RRB Allahabad and was selected for the post of Senior Commercial-cum- Ticket Clerk (Level-5). His document verification and medical examination were completed. For appointment, the attestation form submitted by the applicant was sent to the District Magistrate, Deoria for character and antecedent verification. The District Magistrate, Deoria, vide letter dated 18.09.2023, forwarded the police verification report received from the Superintendent of Police, Deoria. As per the

SRIVASTAVA police report dated 11.09.2023, a criminal case under several IPC

sections was registered against the applicant in the year 2019 and a

charge-sheet had already been filed before the competent court. Based

on this report, the police did not recommend the applicant’s character

verification. In compliance with the order of the Tribunal dated

20.10.2023, the respondents examined the applicant’s representations and, relying on the adverse police verification report, rejected his request for training and appointment by passing the impugned order dated 20.11.2023.

4. The applicant has filed Rejoinder Affidavit to the Counter Affidavit as filed by the 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
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top