Cancellation of promotion panel without mandatory notice and post-training violates administrative circulars and legitimate expectation.

The Union of India (Petitioner) challenged a Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) judgment dated 14 November 2025 which set aside the cancellation of a selection process for the post of Junior Engineer (Electrical General).

The Respondents (Technician-II employees) were empanelled for promotion on 5 February 2024 after clearing a written examination.

Per the empanelment notice, promotion was subject to completing two years of feeder service and a training course.

The Respondents completed the required training between July and December 2024 and reported for posting.

However, on 30 April 2025, the Petitioner cancelled the entire selection panel and examination, citing repeated questions in the paper and incorrect answer keys.

The CAT ruled in favor of the Respondents, leading to this writ petition.

Northern Railway Notification dated 05.03.2025, which mandates that only pending selections not finalized and approved by 04.03.2025 be cancelled.

Railway Board Circular dated 11.11.2019, which requires that "due notice" must be given to selected candidates if a selection is to be cancelled due to procedural irregularities after the declaration of results.

Paragraph 219(a) of the Indian Railway Establishment Manual (IREM) regarding the necessity of approval from the competent authority for selection proceedings.

The principle that wholesale cancellation of a selection is only permissible in cases of large-scale malpractices or fraud, rather than routine administrative errors.

The empanelment was finalized on 5 February 2024, nearly a year before the cut-off date (4 March 2025) mentioned in the 2025 Notification; thus, the selection was "finalized" and immune from the blanket cancellation order.

The Petitioner failed to issue notice to the Respondents before scrapping the panel, which is a mandatory procedural requirement under the 2019 Circular.

The Court noted that since no mala fides or unfair means were attributed to the Respondents, the mere presence of repeated questions or minor key errors did not justify the "drastic" step of de novo selection, especially after the Respondents had shifted their position by completing intensive training.

The Court characterized the cancellation at the threshold of appointment as "disquieting" and an abuse of administrative discretion.

The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition and affirmed the CAT’s judgment. The Petitioner is directed to restore the panel dated 5 February 2024 and issue posting orders to the Respondents as Junior Engineers with all consequential benefits, including seniority and notional pay fixation, within eight weeks.