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) 3761

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Suchitto Kumar Das, Administrative Member, Diwakar Singh, Judicial Member
Arvind Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
O.A. 1111/2014|M.A. 271/2014



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: P. Mondal, Argha Chakraborty
For the Respondents: P.N. Sharma

The validity of a recruitment panel cannot be extended for a candidate who fails to join the allotted post without sufficient cause, particularly when the failure to report for duty is attributable to the candidate rather than administrative reasons.

Headnote:(A) Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 - Section 19 - Recruitment process - Validity of panel - Applicant selected for post but failed to join after being declared medically fit - Panel expired while applicant remained silent or submitted inadequate medical documentation - Railway instructions regarding extension of panel currency require administrative justification for delay, which was absent due to applicant's own failure to join - Delay in filing original application was not satisfactorily explained - Application for condonation of delay and the original application dismissed. (Paras 6, 8, 9)

Facts of the case:
The applicant was selected for the post of Junior Engineer in 2008 and declared medically fit on 22.01.2009. He failed to join the post or provide intimation to the respondents for a considerable period. After the expiry of the recruitment panel, he sought to join, relying on medical certificates for a partial period. The respondents maintained that no administrative exigency existed to justify extending the expired panel. The applicant filed the original application in 2014, long after the cause of action, without satisfactory justification for the delay.

Findings of Court:
The Tribunal found that the applicant had been afforded multiple opportunities to join but remained absent without permission. As the panel had expired and the delay in joining was not due to any administrative default, there was no ground to direct an extension of the panel. Furthermore, the significant delay in approaching the Tribunal was not condoned.

Issues: Whether the applicant is entitled to an appointment after the expiry of the recruitment panel, and whether the delay in filing the application for relief should be condoned.

Ratio Decidendi: Extension of the currency of a recruitment panel beyond the prescribed period requires administrative justification or evidence that the delay was caused by administrative reasons; where an applicant fails to join despite multiple opportunities, they do not acquire a vested right to compel the extension of an expired panel.

Result: O.A and M.A dismissed.

Table of Content
1. initiation of legal proceedings for appointment relief. (Para 1 , 2)
2. administrative policy on panel validity and candidate responsibility. (Para 3 , 4 , 7 , 8)
3. non-condonation of significant delay in filing applications. (Para 5 , 6 , 9 , 10)

O R D E R

Per Hon’ble Mr. Suchitto Kumar Das, Administrative Member :

1. The applicant has approached this Tribunal under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 praying for the following relief(s):

“i) The respondents may be directed to consider the case of the applicant allowing him to join to the post of Junior Engineer, for which he was selected after quashing any order, if at all post denying the appointment of the applicant.

ii) The respondents may be directed to send the applicant for training as per the rules of the Railways.

iii) The cost of litigation may be awarded in favour of the applicant.

iv) Any other relief or reliefs may be granted in favour of the applicant, which appears to be just and proper by this Hon'ble Court in the facts circumstances of the case.”

2. Facts as narrated by the applicant are as follows:

The applicant was selected for the post of Junior Engineer Grade-II/BRG/E against Employment Notice No. 01/2006 and the examination conducted by the Railway Recruitment Board, Kolkata. The appointment letter dated 06.01.2009 was issued to the applicant by the Senior Personnel Officer (W)/CLW/Chitranjan. The applicant was thereafter medically tested and he was found fit for ‘C-1’ category by the Medical Officer vide Medical Report dated 22.01.2009. The applicant thereafter fell ill and could not join as directed by the Railway Officer. Assistant Personnel Officer (W)/CLW/Chitranjan by letter dated 17.02.2008 and 21.04.2009 gave reminders and requested the applicant to join the selected post within 10 days from the date of issuance of the letter. The applicant who had fallen ill due to certain problems in the family could not join as required by the respondents. The applicant after recovering from his illness and coming out of trouble, by a letter dated 12.01.2010 addressed to the Deputy CPO/(W)/Chitranjan, requested him to kindly accept his joining. The applicant sent a reminder dated 18.05.2010 to the Chief Personnel Officer (W)/CLW/Chitranjan. By a letter dated 27.08.2010, the SPO(W)/CLW/Chitranjan on behalf of the Deputy CPO (W)/CLW/Chitranjan wrote to the applicant that the application of the applicant has been received by them and asked him to produce the medical certificate in original. The applicant on 22.09.2010 submitted the documents to the SPO(W)/CLW/Chitaranjan. The applicant again on 10.12.2010 submitted certificate and other documents including a declaration that in the meantime he was not working in any Government or private organization and was not earning. The applicant did not receive any information from the respondents and he was waiting for an order from the Department, allowing him to join. The applicant also made a representation before the General Manager, Chitranjan Locomotive Works on 28.09.2011. The respondents did not issue any order of joining to the applicant, since the panel had expired. Hence this O.A.

3. Ld. Counsel for the applicant submits that the Railway Board by its Notification No. 9/10, 7.1964 observed that the currency of the panel may be extended by one year with the personal approval of the General Manager and if further extension is required, the matter can be referred to the Railway Board. Ld. Counsel for the applicant submits that in the meantime, the applicant’s father Rajpati Tanti @ Rajpati Prasad had fallen seriously ill and was referred to C.M.C. Vellore. After long illness, the father of the applicant died on 08.04.2012. The younger sister of the applicant, died all of a sudden on 04.08.2011 due to respiratory failure. Applicant was treated for Infective Hepatitis from 23.10.2009 to 08.01.2010. Ld. Counsel for the applicant submits that the respondents, can refer the ma

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