CAT Rejects Heirs’ Bid to Undo Order Directing Railway to Refer Deceased Employee’s Caste Certificate for Scrutiny

The original applicant, a railway employee, obtained an order allowing his Original Application: the Tribunal quashed the order terminating his service and remitted the matter to the disciplinary authority to refer his caste certificate and related records to the competent Caste Scrutiny Committee/High Power Committee.

After the original applicant died, his legal representatives sought review, arguing that an enquiry against a deceased employee was impermissible under the Railway Servant (Discipline & Appeal) Rules, 1968, and that the termination had violated the principles in Ku. Madhuri Patil because the employee had made no misrepresentation.

The Tribunal treated its review power as governed by Section 114 and Order 47 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Review is confined to the prescribed grounds, including an error apparent on the face of the record; an error requiring a long process of reasoning, disagreement with the original decision, or a request to substitute one view for another is insufficient.

The Tribunal relied on State of West Bengal v. Kamal Sengupta, (2008) 8 SCC 612, for these limits, and on Rajendra Kumar v. Rambhai, (2007) 15 SCC 513, and Inder Chand Jain v. Motilal, (2009) 14 SCC 663, for the principles that review is not an appeal or rehearing and cannot disturb finality absent an apparent error.

The Tribunal considered the applicants’ grounds against the narrow scope of review. It held that the arguments concerning the original applicant’s death, the alleged bar on an enquiry under the Railway Servant (Discipline & Appeal) Rules, 1968, and the asserted absence of misrepresentation did not demonstrate an apparent error in the original order.

Those contentions did not satisfy the governing review standard and could not be used to reopen or reargue the merits of the Original Application.

It left the applicants to pursue any other appropriate remedy available in law.