Reserved on 27.08.2026

ORDER

(Delivered by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Om Prakash VII, Member (J)

Shri M.K. Upadhyay, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Anil Kumar, learned counsel for the respondents, are present and heard.

2. The instant original application has been filed seeking following relief:

(i) issue an order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned letter/ order dated 21/22.06.2016 issued by the respondents no. 3.

(ii) issue nature order an of respondent or direction in the mandamus directing concerned the to authorities appoint the applicant finally on the post of Carriage Cleaner for which the applicant has been selected within specific period as this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case, so that justice may be done.

(iii)to pass other and further orders which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case.

(iv) Award the cast of the original application.

3. The brief facts of the case, as narrated in the Original Application, are that the applicant had applied pursuant to the advertisement dated 30.12.2013 issued by the respondents for filling up certain vacancies. It is the case of the applicant that he participated in the selection process and successfully cleared all the stages of the examination. Thereafter, an offer of appointment was issued to him and he was directed to appear for document verification. According to the applicant, he duly appeared for document verification; however, no further direction was issued to him to join the post against which he had been selected. It is further the case of the applicant that, despite making several representations in this regard, his candidature was ultimately rejected vide communication dated 21/22.06.2016 with the following endorsement: “During document verification before appointment in Firozpur Division, it was noticed that the required 10th class certificate submitted by you, issued by Gurukul Vishwavidyalaya, Vrindavan, is not from a recognized Board for appointment in Railway.” The applicant has pleaded that he passed the 10th Class examination, namely Adhikari Pariksha, in the year 2008 from Gurukul Vishwavidyalaya, Vrindavan, Mathura, and that the said qualification was recognized as equivalent to the High School examination conducted by the Board of High School and Intermediate Education, Uttar Pradesh. On the basis of the aforesaid, the applicant has sought issuance of an offer of appointment by treating the qualification possessed by him as having been obtained from a recognized institution.

4. Per contra, by filing a Counter Affidavit, the respondents have taken the stand that the institution from which the applicant passed the requisite qualification, i.e., the 10th Class examination, was not recognized for the purpose of appointment in the Railways. It is, therefore, contended that the impugned order rejecting the candidature of the applicant was rightly passed. The respondents have further pleaded that mere issuance of an offer of appointment and calling the applicant for document verification does not confer upon him any indefeasible right to appointment. In paragraph no. 16 of the Counter Affidavit, the respondents have specifically pleaded that Gurukul Vishwavidyalaya, Vrindavan, Mathura, is not recognized by the Council of Boards of School Education in India (COBSE), and, therefore, there is no illegality in the impugned order rejecting the candidature of the applicant.

5. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

6. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant passed the 10th Class Adhikari Pariksha, which is equivalent to the High School examination conducted by the Board of High School and Intermediate Education, Uttar Pradesh, in the year 2008. It is submitted that, up to the year 2008, Gurukul Vishwavidyalaya, Vrindavan, was a recognized institution for conducting