Back
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
S. Sujatha, Member (J), Sanjiv Kumar, Member (A)
Vinod Kumar N K – Appellant
Versus
General Manager, Rail Wheel Factory – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. applicant seeks quashing of rejection and retrospective promotion to junior engineer. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. facts confirm eligibility but selection delayed, training incomplete pre-retirement. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. master circular timelines directory; no malafide in selection process. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 4. mandatory 78-day training non-waivable; ad-hoc promotion exceptional, not right. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 5. no fundamental right to promotion post-retirement; no discrimination found. (Para 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25) |
| 6. application dismissed; no costs. (Para 26) |
ORDER
PER: DR. SANJIV KUMAR, MEMBER (A)
This Original Application is filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act 1985, claiming the following reliefs:
“(i) Quash the Communication dtd 25-07-2022 (Annexure A1) issued by the 3rd Respondent with the approval of the 2nd Respondent rejecting the representation of the Applicant dtd 20-7-2022 (Annexure A2) seeking promotion to the cadre of Jr Engineer, Rail Wheel Factory, Yelahanka Grant any such relief, as deemed fit in the facts and circumstances of the case, and in the interest of justice.
(ii) Direct the Respondents to accor
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
