Internal procedural lapses and staff shortages cannot justify withholding relieving orders for employees selected for tenure-based posts.

The applicant was appointed as a Senior Section Engineer (SSE) on 21.11.2016 and was later transferred to the Construction Organization of North Eastern Railway, Gorakhpur, on 17.01.2020

In August 2025, the Research Designs and Standards Organization (RDSO), a unit of the Ministry of Railways, notified tenure-based vacancies for SSE.

The applicant applied on 26.09.2025 after obtaining approval from the Assistant Personnel Officer (APO) and a ‘No Objection Certificate’ from the Chief Engineer/Con-IV

Following selection, RDSO issued a selection letter on 02.12.2025 and requested his relieving on 09.12.2025

However, the Varanasi Division (where the applicant maintains his lien) withheld his relieving via an order dated 24.02.2026, citing a shortage of P. Way staff and procedural lapses in forwarding the application without the Division's consent

Subsequently, the applicant was transferred to Siwan on 10.03.2026 to fill a local vacancy

1. Whether the respondent authorities are justified in withholding the applicant's relieving for a selected tenure post at RDSO on the grounds of administrative staff shortage and internal procedural lapses

2. Whether an employee can be penalized for the failure of departmental officials to follow established internal procedures when forwarding an application for deputation

The court applied general principles of administrative law regarding departmental accountability and the rights of employees selected for tenure/deputation posts within the same Ministry.

It emphasized that procedural errors committed by forwarding authorities (APO/Chief Engineer) cannot be used to the detriment of an employee who acted in good faith

The court further scrutinized the administrative discretion used to deny relieving, noting that such discretion must not be used as an "afterthought" to justify internal administrative failures or to override the career prospects of an unblemished employee

The Tribunal observed that the applicant followed the prescribed process by seeking approval from the Construction unit where he was posted

The court rejected the respondents' plea that the Varanasi Division's approval was missing, holding that it was the duty of the forwarding officials (APO and Chief Engineer) to ensure all internal approvals were in place

The court noted that the respondents themselves admitted to procedural negligence by their officials and suggested disciplinary action against them; however, the applicant cannot be made to suffer for their ignorance of rules

Regarding the "shortage of staff" plea, the Tribunal found it inconsistent, as the respondents had previously transferred the applicant out of the Division in 2020.

The sudden transfer order to Siwan on 10.03.2026 was termed an "afterthought to justify their own wrong"

The court underscored that since RDSO and the zonal railways are all units of the Indian Railways, the internal administrative hurdles should not block the applicant's selection

The Tribunal held that the applicant is entitled to join the tenure post at RDSO.

It directed Respondent No. 6 (Senior Divisional Personnel Officer, Varanasi) to relieve the applicant within one month from the receipt of the order to enable him to join RDSO as per the selection letters dated 02.12.2025 and 09.12.2025

No costs were awarded