Promotions must adhere to reserved-to-reserved and unreserved-to-unreserved criteria, overriding contrary administrative instructions or establishment rules.

The applicant, a Section Controller in the South East Central Railway (SECR), Bilaspur, was eligible for promotion to Chief Controller.

On 27.08.2019, the respondents issued Notification No. 18/2019 for suitability tests for eight posts (UR-05, ST-03) based on Establishment Rule (ER) 02/2019.

The applicant was ranked fifth in the provisional seniority list and was within the zone of consideration.

The respondents subsequently cancelled this notification and issued a fresh Notification No. 75/2019 on 10.12.2019, which redistributed vacancies (UR-04, SC-01, ST-03) and applied ER 72/2017.

Under this older rule, SC/ST candidates were adjusted against unreserved (UR) points based on general seniority, which resulted in the applicant being excluded from the zone of consideration.

1. Whether the respondents could arbitrarily bypass Establishment Rule 02/2019 and apply Establishment Rule 72/2017 to exclude the applicant from the zone of consideration.

2. Whether the issuance of Notification No. 75/2019 violated the principles laid down by the Supreme Court regarding "reserved to reserved" and "unreserved to unreserved" promotions.

The Tribunal primarily relied on the Supreme Court's directions in Jarnail Singh Ors. v. Lachhmi Narain Gupta Ors. (2018), which stipulated that during the pendency of litigation, the Union of India could proceed with promotions from "reserved to reserved" and "unreserved to unreserved" categories.

It also applied Railway Board Establishment Rule 02/2019, which was issued as a direct consequence of the Jarnail Singh judgment to regulate such promotions.

The Tribunal referenced the Chhattisgarh High Court’s decision in WP (S) No. 4398/2018, which held that promotions granted in breach of the ratio in M. Nagaraj v. Union of India cannot be sustained.

The Tribunal observed that Establishment Rule 02/2019 was specifically promulgated to align departmental promotions with the Supreme Court's interim directions in the Jarnail Singh case.

The respondents’ justification—that ER 72/2017 was applied to maintain "uniformity" across all three divisions of the SECR—was rejected as legally untenable.

The Tribunal reasoned that administrative instructions or the goal of uniformity cannot override the law of the land established by the Apex Court.

Specifically, the respondents’ action of adjusting reserved category candidates against UR blocks under the older 2017 rule effectively bypassed the "unreserved to unreserved" mandate, thereby unfairly displacing the applicant from the seniority list.

The Tribunal further noted that similar attempts by the Railways to ignore the Jarnail Singh principles had already been quashed by the Chhattisgarh High Court in multiple Writ Petitions.

Consequently, the Tribunal quashed Notification No. 75/2019 dated 10.12.2019.

The respondents were directed to consider the applicant’s case for promotion to Chief Controller based on his standing in the promotional seniority list under the original Notification No. 18/2019 dated 27.08.2019.

The exercise for compliance was ordered to be completed within three months from the receipt of the certified copy of the order.