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) 4653

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Jayesh V Bhairavia, Judicial Member, Hukum Singh Meena, Administrative Member
RAJESH MEENA – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
OA



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Ms.S.S.Chaturvedi
For the Respondents: Ms.R.R.Patel

Reserved category candidate topping merit without relaxations must be placed against unreserved vacancy, not reserved quota, per DoP&T and Railway Board guidelines.

Headnote:(A) Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 - Section 19 - Reservation in promotion - LDCE for Group B posts - SC/ST candidate securing highest marks without relaxation of standards must be adjusted against unreserved vacancy - Such candidate not to be counted against reserved quota - DoP&T OM dated 01.07.1998 clarifies that only SC/ST/OBC candidates selected on same standards as general candidates shall not be adjusted against reserved vacancies - RBE No.91/2018 permits promotions on merits notwithstanding pendency of SLP - Railway Board letter dated 21.08.1997 stipulates persons appointed on merit occupy unreserved points in roster - No prohibition for reserved category candidate to be promoted on merit to unreserved vacancy - Select panel quashed where topper from reserved category wrongly adjusted against reserved point despite highest merit. (Paras 10, 11, 12)

(B) Reservation policy - Merit v. Reservation - Candidate selected without relaxation of qualifying standards, age, experience or zone of consideration deemed unavailable for reserved vacancies - Adjusted against unreserved points - Promotions to be provisional subject to outcome of pending litigation. (Paras 11, 12.1)

Facts of the case:
Applicant, a loco pilot from reserved category, applied for LDCE to Group B post against 2 vacancies (1 unreserved, 1 reserved). Candidate from reserved category topped merit list with highest marks among 10 qualifiers without any relaxation. Respondents adjusted topper against reserved vacancy and selected another against unreserved, denying applicant reserved post. Applicant challenged select panel and subsequent communications through representations and OA.

Findings of Court:
Select panel dated 12.04.2021 quashed. Respondents directed to revise panel placing top merit candidate (reserved category) against unreserved vacancy and consider next eligible reserved category candidate (applicant) for reserved vacancy, within 90 days, per Railway Board and DoP&T guidelines.

Issues: Whether reserved category candidate securing highest marks without relaxation can be adjusted against reserved vacancy; validity of select panel preparation ignoring merit adjustment to unreserved points.

Ratio Decidendi: Reserved category candidate selected purely on merit without relaxations occupies unreserved vacancy; cannot be forced into reserved quota. Guidelines mandate adjustment against unreserved points, ensuring merit prevails over rote reservation allocation absent relaxations.

Result: OA allowed.

Table of Content
1. factual background of ldce promotion dispute. (Para 1 , 2 , 7 , 8)
2. applicant's claim for own-merit adjustment. (Para 3)
3. respondents defend reserved vacancy allocation. (Para 4)
4. rejoinder reiterates roster violation. (Para 5)
5. court reviews dop&t and rbe guidelines. (Para 6 , 9 , 10 , 11)
6. merit sc/st candidates adjusted to unreserved vacancies. (Para 12)

O R D E R

Per : Hon’ble Dr.Hukum Singh Meena, Member (A)

1. Being aggrieved by the order No.E(G)1024/8/2 (AME/AWM) (CPGRAM) dated 13.04.2022, No.E(G)1024/8/2 (AME/AWM) (CPGRAM) dated 07.04.2022, No.E(G)1024/8/2 (AME/AWM) (CPGRAM) dated 29.10.2021, No.E(G)1024/8/2 (AME/AWM) (CPGRAM) dated 13.10.2021 and No.E(G)1024/8/2 (AME/AWM) (LDCE-2020) dated 12.04.2021 whereby the applicant was not considered for the promotion and panel of AME Mechanical Department, the applicant has filed the present OA under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985 seeking following relief:-

“8.1 Lord ships be pleased to admit this petition. And be pleased to issue order quash and setting aside the following order:

(i) Order no. E(G)1024/8/2 (AME/AWM) (CPGRAM) Date 13.04.2022 Passed by General Manager (A/1),

(ii) Order no. E(G)1024/8/2 (AME/AWM) (CPGRAM) Date 07.04.2022 Passed by General Manager (A/2),

(iii) Order no. E(G)1024/8/2 (AME/AWM) (CPGRAM) Date 29.10.2021 Passed by General Manager (A/3)

(iv) Order no. E(G)1024/8/2 (AME/AWM) (CPGRAM) Date 13.10.2021, Passed by General Manager (A/4), and (v) E(G)1024/8/2 (AME/AWM) (LDCE-2020) Dated 12.04.2021 Passed by General Manager (E), as Annexure A/5.

8.2 And be pleased to direct the respondent to reissue the panel by promoted the respondent no. on own merit and treated as UR and consider the applicant as ST candidates (reserve seat) in the panel as per the RBE no. 91/2018 with all consequential benefit.

8.3 That the Hon'ble Tribunal may be kindly pleased to call for the entire record of the applicant in possession of the respondent for its kind perusal.

8.4 Any other relief which the Hon'ble Tribunal deems fit.”

8.5 That the Hon'ble Tribunal in the facts and circumstances of the present case may further be pleased to grant cost of the application to the applicant.

2. Brief facts of the case of the applicant are as follows:-

2.1 The applicant was working as a Loco Pilot (Passenger) at Bhavnagar Terminus, Bhavnagar Para. He had applied for the post of AME/AWM in response to the notification issued vide order No.E(G) 1024/8/2 (AME/AWM) (LDCE-2020) dated 17.08.2020 for the post of AME/AWM (LDCE-30%) Mechanical Department for 02 vacancies. The applicant submitted that pre-qualifying examination was scheduled on 09.01.2021; main written exam held on 27.02.2021 and viva voce on 30.03.2021. After completion of the examination, other pre-requisite test/examination, the respondent issued the selection order bearing No.E(G)1024/8/2 (AME/AWM) (LDCE-2020) dated 12.04.2021 wherein two candidates were selected viz., Shri Dharammveer C.Meena against ST post and Shri Ajit Kumar against General Category. He further submitted that although Shri Dharmveer got highest marks and top in the merit list however, he was selected against ST vacancy. The applicant further submitted that after selection panel was issued, the respondent communicated the marks of pre-qualifying examination and final written test. Accordingly, Shri Dhramveer C Meena got the total Marks of 108.5; Shri Ajit Kumar got the total marks of 104 and the applicant got the total marks of 95.

2.2 Being aggrieved by the decision of the respondent, the applicant submitted representation dated 13.08.2021 (Annexure-A/8) to the respondent in addition to the grievance received through CPGRAM. In response to the representation, respondents replied vide Memo No.E(G)1024/8/2 (AME/AWM) (CPGRAM) dated 13.10.2021 and mentioned that Shri Dharmveer C Meena ST was placed on the panel of AME/AWM (LDCE) against ST point in terms of Railway Board’s letter RBE No.117/2016 which is against the statutory rules pro

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