Facts
The applicants participated in a departmental selection for promotion to Train Manager (Goods) under the 60% departmental quota, pursuant to a notification dated 17 October 2025.
Source reference: paras. 2–8Although their names appeared among the candidates who passed the written examination, they were not included in the final panel dated 30 July 2026, which empanelled 25 candidates against 56 notified vacancies.
Source reference: paras. 2–8The applicants submitted a joint representation on 1 August 2026 and asked the Tribunal to direct its consideration.
Source reference: paras. 2–8The respondents maintained that the selection and panel complied with applicable rules and instructions.
Source reference: paras. 2–8Issues
Whether the applicants’ grievance concerning their non-inclusion in the final panel and the treatment of vacancies should be considered and decided by the competent authority.
Source reference: paras. 6–10Whether the Tribunal should determine the validity of the panel or the applicants’ entitlement to promotion in this proceeding.
Source reference: paras. 9–10Law Applied
The Tribunal did not apply or determine any specific statutory provision, reservation rule, or substantive precedent governing the selection.
Source reference: paras. 4–5, 10The operative principle was that the competent authority should consider the applicants’ representation and issue a reasoned, speaking order in accordance with law, without the Tribunal expressing an opinion on the underlying entitlement.
Source reference: para. 10Reasoning
The dispute required examination of records concerning the vacancies, selection process, written examination result, final panel, and allocation of vacancies.
Source reference: paras. 6–10Because the applicants had already submitted a representation and sought its consideration, the Tribunal considered it appropriate to refer the grievance to the competent authority rather than adjudicate the selection’s legality or the applicants’ entitlement to promotion at that stage.
Source reference: paras. 6–10The Tribunal expressly left those substantive questions open.
Source reference: paras. 6–10Holding
The Tribunal disposed of the Original Application without deciding the validity of the panel or the applicants’ entitlement to promotion.
It directed the competent authority to consider and decide the representation dated 1 August 2026, together with any fresh, comprehensive representation and supporting material the applicants may submit, by a reasoned and speaking order within three weeks of receiving a certified copy of the order.
Source reference: paras. 10–11The decision must be communicated to the applicants forthwith.
Source reference: paras. 10–11No order as to costs; pending miscellaneous applications, if any, were also disposed of.
Source reference: paras. 10–11Original Court PDF
Manoj Kumar and othervsNORTH EASTERN RAILWAY
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
![Railway Authority Must Decide Promotion-Selection Grievance by Speaking Order Within Three Weeks. Manoj Kumar and other vs NORTH EASTERN RAILWAY. CAT - ['Allahabad']. LawLens](/stories/thumbnails/railway-authority-must-decide-promotion-selection-grievance-by-speaking-order-within-three-ae76d57d0e4a4f7389e936d844848a0e.webp)