CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH CIRCUIT SITTING AT SHIMLA O.A. No.1241/2023 (Shimla)

Reserved on: 25.09.2025 Pronounced on: 31.10.2025 HON’BLE MR. RAMESH SINGH THAKUR, MEMBER (J)

HON’BLE MRS. ANJALI BHAWRA, MEMBER (A)

Veena Chandel W/o Shri Bikram Singh Chandel, resident of Man, (19/45), Hamirpur, Himachal Pradesh.

…Applicant (BY ADVOCATE: Mr. Himanshu Thakur)

VERSUS Northern Railway Board of India through its Senior Divisional Manager, Northern Railway, DRM Office, Firozpur-152001.

...Respondent (BY ADVOCATE: Mr. Nand Lal Thakur).

Digitaly signed by Satyanarayana SatyanarV D a N n : a C p = a I l N i , O=GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, OU=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, Phone=

6f592c8349948910e1de6c2931b0bac4a ayana 9bb734425eb6fc8a5e181f034b2b77, PostalCode=342006, S=RAJASTHAN, SERIALNUMBER=

053f205c047576d405aa21e40b02de094 Vanapalli5 C 3 N d = d S 2 a e t a y 8 a a n 4 a 7 ra 8 y f7 a 4 n d a 4 V 0 a 2 n fb a 5 p b a 4 l 7 i c88e59, O R D E R Per: HON’BLE MRS. ANJALI BHAWRA, MEMBER (A):

1. This O.A has been filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 seeking the following reliefs:

“(i) That impugned Annexure A-7, A-10 and A-11 may very kindly be quashed and set aside.

(ii) That the respondents may be directed to give promotion and retiral benefits to the applicant i.e. gratuity, leave encashment and commutation of pension etc with penal interest on the delay and injustice.”

2. The brief facts of the case as submitted by the applicant are as follows:

I. The applicant was appointed as Office Clerk Class III category under handicapped quota with the respondent department on 07.08.1984 (Annexure A-1) along with copy of letter of Divisional Railway Manager Northern Railway Firozpur to the applicant whereby the applicant was directed to appear in the medical examination vide letter dated 31.05.1984 (Annexure A/2). The applicant vide at A-1 was initially required in Class III Office Clerk Gr. Rs.260-400/- and was placed on the panel of handicapped quota after passing the medical test.

II. The applicant after appointment got promotion in the year 1994 after a result of written suitability test for the post of Sr. Clerk (Engg) grade Rs.1200-2040/- vide office note dated 13.05.1994 (Annexure A/3) along with their regularization to the post of Sr. Clerk Gr. Rs.1200-2040/- dated 27-05-1994. The applicant got her second promotion in the year 1997 and Digitaly signed by Satyanarayana SatyanarV D a N n : a C p = a I l N i , O=GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, was promoO TR U I = BtC U E NeN A T L R , dP A h L o A n D e= MfINrISToRATmIVE Sr. Clerk to Head clerk (Engg) in Grade Rs. 1400-2300/-

6f592c8349948910e1de6c2931b0bac4a ayana 9bb734425eb6fc8a5e181f034b2b77, PostalCode=342006, S=RAJASTHAN, SERIALNUMBER=

053f205c047576d405aa21e40b02de094 V. a Tnhaep saalliid 5 C 3 N d = d S 2 pa e t a y 8 a a nr 4 a 7 ra 8 oy f7 a 4 n d am 4 V 0 a 2 n fb a 5 p b ao 4 l 7 i c8 t 8e5 i 9 o , n was on the basis of the senior most Sr. Clerk in which applicant was also included vide office notice dated 26.08.1997 (Annexure A-4). The applicant was also given the Handicapped Allowance vide order dated 16.04.1985 (Annexure A-5). The applicant got her 3rd promotion in the year 2018 and was promoted from Head Clerk (Engg) Level-6 to Level-7 vide notice dated 16.03.2018 Annexure A-6).

III. It is submitted by the applicant that the applicant is aggrieved with the notification dated 10.08.2021 as the applicant was included in the seniority list by the respondent but has not been given the promotion despite being the fact that the employees at Sl.No.2 and Sl No.11 of the list have willfully not taken the promotion in Ministerial Staff, Palampur, but have taken promotion in up-gradation construction CDG Chandigarh, and as a matter of fact the applicant should have been promoted as she was At Sl No.13 on the Seniority List of Ministerial Staff working in Engg. Deptt. in Firozpur Division (Annexure A-7). The applicant has raised an objection regarding the seniority list