Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench, New Delhi O.A. No. 61/2025 This the 4th day of December, 2025 Hon’ble Mr. Manish Garg, Member (J)

Hon’ble Dr. Anand S Khati, Member (A)

Subodh Kumar Singh S/o Sh. Munshilal Singh R/o R-118, Karan Vihar, Part -6, Gali No. 10, Kirari, Suleman Nagar, Delhi (Aged about years)

(Candidate to the posts in Pay Band

5200-20200 with G.P. 1800/- in Railways)

...Applicant (By Advocate(s): Mr. Ajesh Luthra with Ms. Meenu Sharma)

Versus

1. Union of India Through General Manager, Northern Railways Headquarter Office, Baroda House, New Delhi-110001

2. Chairperson Railway Recruitment Cell, Lajpat Nagar - I New Delhi 110024

3. Chief Personnel Officer Northern Railways Headquarter Office Baroda House, New Delhi-110001

4. Assistant Personal Officer Railway Recruitment Cell Northern Railway, Lajpat Nagar New Delhi-110024 ….Respondents (By Advocate(s): Mr. U Srivastava)

ORDER (ORAL)

Hon’ble Mr. Manish Garg, Member (J)

The present O.A. has been filed by the applicant under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, seeking following reliefs:-

“(a) Call for the records of the case and (b) Quash and set aside impugned order dated 22.11.2024 (Annexure A/1) alongwith show cause notice dated 16.10.2024 (Annexure A/2) and;

(c) Direct the respondents to forthwith appoint the applicant to the post(s) in pay band 5200-20200 with Grade pay Rs. 1800/- (pre-revised) pursuant to applicant’s selection towards the advertisement issued in the year 2014.

(d) Accord all consequential benefits including seniority and monetary benefits (e) Award costs of the proceedings; and (D Pass any order/relief/direction(s) as this Hon,ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the interests of justice in favour of the applicants"

2. Highlighting the facts of the present case, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the candidature of the applicant has been rejected by the respondents vide a speaking order passed by them on 12.08.2025 in compliance of the direction of this Tribunal passed in O.A. No. 1048/2015. For ready reference the speaking order reads as under:-

“5. Accordingly you were not shortlisted for further process of selection. However now in compliance to Hon'able tribunal orders, it is informed that you have scored 86.67 marks but these marks in no way, give you any right of further consideration for appointment in Railway as you are found indulged in the malpractices/used unfair means during examination and your candidature itself already stands rejected/cancelled for the reason given above”

2.1. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant had been informed that he has secured 86.67 marks.

2.2. He submits that this is his third round of litigation, in his earlier round of litigation in O.A. No. 3915/2015, the Tribunal has made the following observations:-

“5. We note that the impugned order does not contain any specifics. It does not give detail regarding the unfair means used by applicants. Unless the details are provided applicants cannot meet the allegation. Hon’ble High Court in Writ Petition No. 10621/2018 has directed respondents to issue a SCN in identical circumstances. Following the decision of the Hon’ble High Court, the OA is disposed of in similar terms. The impugned order is quashed and set aside. Respondents are granted liberty to issue a show cause notice to the applicants, within four weeks, along with all supporting documents in support of the claim that the applicants have resorted to unfair means during the exam dated 20.02.2015. The applicants will file reply to the show cause notice within four weeks’ thereafter and the respondents shall decide the same and pass a reasoned and speaking order thereon. In case, the reply furnished by the applicants to the show cause notice is found satisfactory and the respondents decide to offer an appointment to the applicants, the same shall be done without any benefits of retrospective appointment. Needless to say if the applicants ar