The necessity of ensuring fair hearing opportunities in administrative tribunal proceedings is essential to uphold principles of natural justice.

JUDGMENT

ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.

The prayers in the afore captioned Original Petition (CAT) filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India are as follows (See page No.9 of the paper book of this O.P):

“(i) Call for the records connected with the case and peruse the same.

(ii) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, calling for the records leading to Ext.P11 order and quash the same.

(iii) Direct the learned Tribunal for consider the matter afresh after accepting the reply statement on to the files and grant an opportunity of hearing the petitioner and pass fresh orders..

(iv) Grant such other reliefs as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper.

(v) Award the cost of the proceedings.”

2. Heard Sri.Premchand.R.Nair, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in the O.P/R9 in the O.A before the Tribunal, Sri.B.Rajesh, learned Standing Counsel for the Railways appearing for official respondents 1 to 4, Sri.Martin.G.Thottam, learned counsel appearing for contesting respondents 5 to 9 in the O.P/respondents 5 to 8 & 10 in the O.A and Smt.Shameena Salahudheen, learned counsel appearing for contesting respondent No.10 in the O.P/sole applicant in the O.A before the Tribunal.

3. The prayers in Ext.P1 Original Application, O.A No.229/2019 filed by the R10 herein/original applicant before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ernakulam Bench are as follows (See page No.18 of this paper book):

“(i) To call for the records leading to Anx.A1 and set aside the same to the extent of non inclusion of the applicant and the inclusion of the ineligible candidates who scored lesser marks than the applicant.

(ii) Direct the respondents 1 to 3 to re-evaluate the answer script of the applicant and award marks.

(iii) Declare that the applicant is entitled to be included in the select list for the post of Junior Engineer.

(iv) Such other reliefs as may be prayed for and this Tribunal may deem fit to grant.

(v) Grant the cost of this original application.”

4. The Tribunal after hearing both sides has rendered the impugned Ext.P11 final order dated 03-02-2021 in O.A No.229/2019, wherein it has been held that the re-evaluation of the original applicant’s answer script for the selection examination in question was blatantly wrong and that the respondents Railway authorities themselves now conceived she should have been given 69 marks out of 100 in the said examination and inasmuch as she has not been awarded marks even for many attempted questions in one of the sections of the examination and further it has been directed in para No.13 thereof, that the respondents railway authorities should re-evaluate and re-tabulate the answer sheet of the original applicant and thereafter the final selection list shall be revised in accordance with such revised marks if any granted to the applicant. The Tribunal has also noted in para No.14 of the impugned Ext.P11 final order that on the basis of the interlocutory order earlier passed by the Tribunal in the O.A, she had already successfully completed her training and accordingly the Tribunal has directed in para 14 thereof, that she may be provisionally posted against a suitable post as Junior Engineer /Permanent Way within one month and that if ultimately her name appears in the final selection list after the abovesaid re-evaluation of her answer script, her posting should be made regular and her position may be fixed as per her due seniority, etc. It is this final order at Ext.P11 that has been challenged at the instance of R9 in the O.A.

5. The main contentions urged by the petitioner herein (R9 in the O.A) is to the effect that, though he had engaged an Advocate of his choice before the Tribunal after getting notice in the said O.A, and the said Advocate had filed his Vakalath in the case, the name of the Advocate of R9 in the O.A/petitioner herein was not shown in the cause list published by the Tribunal for the day in question and that therefore he was not notifying that the ca