LAXMI NARAYAN vs General Manager N C Rly
- Court
- Central Administrative Tribunal
OA No. 627 of 2015
Open Court
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
ALLAHABAD BENCH
ALLAHABAD .
st
Allahabad this, the 01 day of October , 2026
Original Application No. 627 of 2015
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Joshi, Member (Judicial)
Hon’ble Mr. Anjani Nandan Sharan, Member (Administrative)
Laxmi Narayan, S/o Shri Ram Swaroop, aged about 60 years, R/o
Bhounakpur, P/o-Murhi, Distt. Aurayia.
…..Applicant
By Advocate : Shri Ravi Sharma
VERSUS
1. Union of India through the General Manager, North Central Railway,
Headquarters Office, Subedarganj, Allahabad.
2. The General Manager, North Central Railway, Headquarters Office,
Subedarganj, Allahabad.
3. The Divisional Railway Manager, North Central Railway, DRM Office,
Allahabad.
4. The Senior Divisional Electrical Engineer, North Central Railway, DRM
Office, Allahabad.
5. The Assistant Divisional Personnel Officer, North Central Railway,
Allahabad.
... .Respondents
By Advocate : Shri V.K. Shukla
O R D E R
By Justice Rajiv Joshi, Member (Judicial)
Shri Ravi Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant has sent illness
slip. Shri V.K. Shukla, learned counsel for the respondents is present.
2. On 24.09.2026, the case was adjourned on the ground of illness slip
of Shri Ravi Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant wherein it was
ordered that no further adjournment shall be granted in the matter as the
RAJEEV KUMAR MISHRA
Page 1 of 7
OA No. 627 of 2015
matter pertains to 2015 and the next date was fixed for 29.09.2026. On
29.09.2026, the matter was also adjourned on the illness slip of learned
counsel for the applicant. On that date, it was also directed that no further
adjournment shall be granted in the matter as the matter pertains to 2015.
Today also learned counsel for the applicant has sent illness slip. Therefore,
the matter is finally decided in the absence of counsel for the applicant.
3. This OA has been filed by the applicant (Laxmi Narayan) for the
following relief(s) :-
8.1. That the Hon'ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to direct the
Divisional Railway Manager, North Central Railway, Allahabad, Respondent
No. 3 to consider the applicant for promotion on the post of Sr. Clerk against
selection for promotion on the post of Sr. Clerk against 66-2/3% promotee
quota as a general candidate as held vide notification dated 4.9.2013 as the
applicant was the senior most clerk of Electrical Department to be promoted
on the post of Sr. Clerk against this selection but his name was wrongly and
illegally deleted from the eligibility list to adjust/promote medically
decategorized employees in gross violation to the Railway Board orders and
to the great disadvantage to the applicant. Further, sufficient posts were
available against this selection being not filled up from General candidates.
8.2. That the Hon'ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to direct the DRM,
NCR, Allahabad, Respondent No. 3 to consider the case of applicant for
financial upgradation against ACP scheme on completion of 24 years of
service and 12 years of service on the post of Junior Clerk. As such, the
applicant was entitled for ACP in Grade of Sr. Clerk w.e.f. November, 2013 and
DRM may be directed to fix pay of the applicant accordingly with payment of
arrear to him on this account.
8.3. That the Hon'ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to direct the DRM,
NCR, Allahabad, Respondent No. 3 to correct the pay fixation of the applicant
as wrongly done while promoting him on the post of Junior Clerk on
21.11.2001 in Grade Rs. 2650-4000 fixing his pay to Rs. 3950 instead of Rs.
4030 as per pay fixation rules and accordingly, the DRM, may be directed to
correct pay fixation of the applicant and making payment of arrear also along
with payment of settlement dues of applicant after his retirement from Railway
Service on 30.6.2014.
8.4 That the Hon'ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to direct the
DRM/NCR/Allahabad, Respondent No. 3 to fix pay of the applicant in higher
grade i.e. Sr. Clerk, correct fixation of pay and fixation of pay after benefit of
ACP Scheme with payment of arrear of pay on this account and arrear of
revised, all retrial dues and pensionary benefits with payment of interest @
12% per annum.
8.5 That the Hon'ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to direct the General
Manager North Center Railway, respondent issue clear no. 2 to
directions/orders/policy decision as para 124 of Indian Railway Establishment,
Code Vol-I for absorption of medically decategorised staffs in other unit of
working staff protecting their right in their cadre for further promotion as per
Railway Board order dated 29.04.1999 (RBE 89/99).
8.6 That the Hon'ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to pass any other
order or direction as may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances
of the case.
RAJEEV KUMAR MISHRA
Page 2 of 7
OA No. 627 of 2015
4. Subsequently the relief was amended and incorporated by the
applicant by way of amendment for the following relief :-
“8.1 (a) That the Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to quash and set
aside the impugned order dated 10/17.10.2013 (Annexure No.–A-1) along with
impugned order dated 06/03/2013 (Annexure No. A-5) passed by the
Respondent No-5/ Assistant Divisional Personnel officer, North Central
Railway, Allahabad."
5. In the relief clause, the applicant challenged the order dated
10/17.10.2013 (Annexure-A-1) along with order dated 06.09.2013 (Annexure-
A-5) passed by Assistant Divisional Personnel Officer, North Central Railway,
Allahabad. It is apparent that in the eligibility test the name of the applicant
was struck off, which was informed by the respondents. The order as
appended as Annexure-A-1 is quoted below :-
940 4/
सं. ई/ ई ओ विद्मुत/सुमोग्मता ऩयीऺा कामारम भण्डर येर प्रफंधक
10-10-2013 ,
ददनाक उत्तय भध्म येरिे इराहाफाद
श्री रक्ष्भी नायामण
कामारम लरवऩक अधीन
o o
ि ख /लसउ/पप ंद/
- PB 5200 - 20200 2800
विषम िरयष्ठ लरवऩक ग्रेड ऩे के ऩद हेतु
66⅔%
ऩदोन्नतत कोटे के अंतगात सुमोग्मता ऩयीऺा कयाई जाने हेतु
4. 9. 2013.
जायी नोदटफपकेशन ददनांक
1900
विद्मुत ियीमता इकाई भें कामायत लरवऩक ग्रेड ऩे से िरयष्ठ लरवऩक
28 00
ग्रेड ऩे के ऩद ऩय ऩदोन्नतत हेतु सुमोजजत ऩयीऺा कयाई जाने के संफंध भें इस
4. 9. 2013
कामारम द्िाया जायी नोदटफपकेशन ददनांक भें आऩका नाभ अंफकत फकमा
2
िषा की सेिा लरवऩक कदय भें
गमा था ऩयंतु भेडडकर अनफपट कभाचायी जजनकी
ऩ णा नहीं है ऩयंतु उनकी वऩछरी सेिा अिधध को जोड़ते हुए उनका ऩात्रता स ची भें
ियीमता क्रभानुसाय फुराए जाने के कायण आऩका नाभ सुमोग्मता ऩयीऺा से हटामा
6. 9. 2013
को के द्िाया आऩके
गमा है जजसकी स चना इस कामारम के ऩत्र ददनांक
िरयष्ठ अधीनस्थ के भाध्मभ से आऩको स धचत फकमा जा चुका है जजसकी छामा प्रतत
साथ भें संरग्न है
सहामक कालभाक अधधकायी
उत्तय भध्म येरिे इराहाफाद
RAJEEV KUMAR MISHRA
Page 3 of 7
OA No. 627 of 2015
6. In the impugned order 06.09.2013, it is stated that the name of the
applicant was removed from the select list based on the merit has been
struck up. The order dated 06.08.2013 is reproduced as below :-
940 4/
सं. ई/ ई ओ विद्मुत/सुमोग्मता ऩयीऺा कामारम भण्डर येर प्रफंधक
06-9—2013 ,
ददनाक उत्तय भध्म येरिे इराहाफाद
सीतन डीईई/टीआयडी/ इरा० एईई/जी/कानऩुय.
एसएसेई/लसउ/पप ंद/
5200-20200 2800 66 2/3%
विषम िरय लरवऩक ऩीफी जीऩी ऩदोन्नतत
ऩद हेतु
कोटे के अन्र्तगत सुमोग्मता ऩयीऺा कयामे जाने के सम्फंध भें।
4-9-2013
संदबा :- इस कामारम द्िाया जायी नोदटफपकेशन ददनांक
4-9-2013
इस कामारम के सग संख्मक ऩत्र ददनांक
के द्िाया विद्मुत विबाग भें
5200-20200 2800
िरय लरवऩक ऩीफी जीऩी
के ऩद ऩय लरखखत सुमोग्मता ऩयीऺा के
लरए जो नोदटफपकेशन जायी फकमा गमा है उसभें आंलशक संशोधन कयते हुए शुद्ध
ऩत्र जायी फकमा जा यहा है अन्म शते ऩ िा भें जायी ऩत्र के अनुसाय मथाित यहेंगी
ऩात्र कभाचायी की स ची
क्रस
नाभ
ऩदनाभ
स्टेशन
1
िी ऩी लसंह
लरवऩक
सहा भें वि अलब/जी/कानऩुय
2
सुयेन्र चौफे
लरवऩक
एसएसई/ऩीएस/इरा
3
यिीन्र लसंह
”
एसएसई/लस उ/ इटािा
4
बुिनेश्िय मादि
“
एसएसई/टीएर/कानऩुय
5
सियजीत लसंह
“
एसएसई/लस उ/ ट ण्डरा
6
दीना नाथ
“
सीतन डीईई/आयएस/कानऩुय
7
एभ के कुरश्रेष्ठ
“
एसएसई/टीएर / इराहाफाद
8
याभ नाथ
“
ऩी एस / ट ण्डरा
9
याजेश्िय प्रसाद
“
SSE/
टीआयडी / भेजा
10
भुनीभ रार अजा
“
सीतन डीईई/टीआयडी/इरा
RAJEEV KUMAR MISHRA
Page 4 of 7
OA No. 627 of 2015
11
सी ऩी लसंह अजा
“
एसएसई/लस उ/ हाथयस
12
अरुण कुभाय अजा
“
एसएसई/ऩीएसआई/इरा.
13
कु० लसयभोरयमा सरयता अजा
“
सीतन डीईई/टीआयडी/इरा
नोट
1. 4 (
चाय) कभाचायी एस सी सभुदाम का कैडय भें कामायत नहीं है।
2. 07-(
यहेंगे ।
सात) एस टी सभुदाम के कभाचायी कैडय भें उऩरब्ध नहीं है इसलरए ण्द रयक्त
3.
श्री रक्ष्भी नायामण का नाभ ऩात्रता स ची से हटामा जाता है
कृते भण्डर कालभाक अधधकाही
,
उत्तय भध्म येरिे इराहाफाद
प्रततलरवऩ
भुख्म कामारम अधीऺक/ई. गोऩनीम।
7. Learned counsel for the respondents has filed the counter affidavit, in
which it has been stated that the eligibility list dated 04.09.2013 was
prepared for selection to the post of Senior Clerk in Grade Pay of Rs. 2,800
under the 66⅔% promotion quota. Due to inadvertence, the name of Shri
V.P. Singh, a medically de-categorized employee senior to the applicant, was
omitted and subsequently included at Serial No. 1 vide office letter dated
06.09.2013. Against 24 vacancies (UR-09, SC-08 and ST-07), eligible staff
were called for the written suitability test as per the extant rules. Since the
applicant, Laxmi Narayan, was placed at Serial No. 9 in the original eligibility
list and the inclusion of Shri V.P. Singh affected the number of candidates to
be called against the nine unreserved vacancies, the applicant's name was
deleted from the list, and he was informed accordingly vide office letters
dated 06.09.2013 and 17.10.2013. The respondents further state that
medically de-categorized employees belonging to other cadres were
adjusted in accordance with the applicable rules. It is also submitted that the
applicant had already been granted the second and third financial
RAJEEV KUMAR MISHRA
Page 5 of 7
OA No. 627 of 2015
upgradations under MACPS in Grade Pay of Rs. 2,000 and Rs. 2,400,
respectively, before his retirement on 30.06.2014. The representation dated
22.03.2014 of the applicant was not received in the office, whereas the
applicant had already been informed in detail about the deletion of his name
from the eligibility list. Therefore, there is no illegality or infirmity in the order
passed by the respondents.
8. In rejoinder affidavit, the applicant has reiterated the similar facts as
given in the OA.
9. Before passing the impugned order, the applicant was aged about 60
years and has already retied much prior to filing of the OA. It is not in dispute
that the applicant superannuated from service on attaining the age of
superannuation. Once the applicant has superannuated, the issue of
promotion cannot be reopened. Since the applicant is no longer in service,
no relief can be granted for retrospective promotion. Recently, the Apex
Court while dealing with the matter regarding retrospective effect promotion
and seniority in case of Government of West Bengal & Ors. Versus Dr. Amal
Satpathi & Ors., reported in 2024 SCC Online SC 3512, it has been held as
under:-
…. “19. It is a well settled principle that promotion becomes effective from the
date it is granted, rather than from the date a vacancy arises or the post is
created. While the Courts have recognized the right to be considered for
promotion as not only a statutory right but also a fundamental right, there is
no fundamental right to the promotion itself. In this regard, we may gainfully
refer to a recent decision of this Court in the case of Bihar State Electricity 10
Board and Others v. Dharamdeo Das , wherein it was observed as follows:
“18. It is no longer res integra that a promotion is effective from the date it is
granted and not from the date when a vacancy occurs on the subject post or
when the post itself is created. No doubt, a right to be considered for
promotion has been treated by courts not just as a statutory right but as a
fundamental right, at the same time, there is no fundamental right to
promotion itself.
Furthermore,
RAJEEV KUMAR MISHRA
Page 6 of 7
OA No. 627 of 2015
“20. In State of Bihar v. Akhouri Sachindra Nath15, it was held that
retrospective seniority cannot be given to an employee from a date when he
was not even borne in the cadre, nor can seniority be given with retrospective
effect as that might adversely affect others. The same view was reiterated in
Keshav Chandra Joshi v. Union of India.
20. In the instant case, it is evident that while respondent No. 1 was
recommended for promotion before his retirement, he could not assume the
duties of the Chief Scientific Officer. Rule 54(1)(a) of the West Bengal Service
Rules, clearly stipulates that an employee must assume the responsibilities of
a higher post to draw the corresponding pay, thus, preventing posthumous or
retrospective promotions in the absence of an enabling provision.”
21. While we recognize respondent No.1’s right to be considered for
promotion, which is a fundamental right under Articles 14 and 16(1) of the
Constitution of India, he does not hold an absolute right to the promotion
itself. The legal precedents discussed above establish that promotion only
becomes effective upon the assumption of duties on the promotional post and
not on the date of occurrence of the vacancy or the date of recommendation.
Considering that respondent No. 1 superannuated before his promotion was
effectuated, he is not entitled to retrospective financial benefits associated to
the promotional post of Chief Scientific Officer, as he did not serve in that
capacity.”
10. In view of the above discussions, no relief is permissible to the
applicant in respect of his promotion after his retirement. Therefore, the
instant Original Application is liable to be dismissed and is accordingly,
dismissed being devoid of merit.
11. All associated MAs also stand disposed of.
(Anjani Nandan Sharan) (Justice Rajiv Joshi)
Member(Administrative) Member(Judicial)
RKM/
RAJEEV KUMAR MISHRA
Page 7 of 7