Railway seniority must follow IREM training merit, placing first-batch successful candidates above those in subsequent batches.

The 39 applicants were initially appointed as Assistant Loco Pilots in the North Eastern Railway and challenged the seniority list dated 29 December 2016 and promotion order dated 13 April 2017.

They contended that, under paragraphs 302 and 303(a) of the Indian Railway Establishment Manual (IREM), they were entitled to seniority over candidates who joined the training subsequently, as the applicants had joined the first training batch and passed the examination in the first attempt.

The respondents maintained that seniority was correctly determined on the basis of marks obtained in the training examination and the applicable provisions of paragraph 303(a) of the IREM.

The applicants further claimed that similar seniority treatment had been given in the Izzatnagar and Varanasi Divisions.

Private respondents nos. 5 to 10, though served, did not appear before the Tribunal.

1. Whether the seniority of the applicants was required to be determined in accordance with paragraph 302 read with paragraph 303(a) of the IREM, having regard to their joining the first training batch and passing the examination in the first attempt.

2. Whether the seniority list dated 29 December 2016 and the promotion order dated 13 April 2017 required revision on that basis.

The Tribunal applied paragraphs 302 and 303(a) of the IREM, 1989.

Paragraph 302 generally provides that seniority in an initial recruitment grade is governed by the date of appointment or, in the case of direct recruits, the date of joining the working post after due process.

Paragraph 303(a) specifically provides that candidates sent for initial training are ranked according to merit in the examination held at the end of training; candidates joining subsequent courses or passing in subsequent chances rank below those who passed earlier.

Where candidates from the same Railway Recruitment Board panel are trained in different batches for administrative reasons, their inter se seniority is to be regulated batch-wise, subject to the conditions prescribed in that provision.

The Tribunal held that paragraph 303(a) clearly links seniority to performance in the training examination and places candidates who join subsequent courses or pass in subsequent attempts below those who pass earlier.

The applicants’ specific assertion that they had joined the first training batch and passed the examination in the first attempt was not specifically rebutted by the respondents.

Likewise, their claim that comparable treatment had been accorded in the Izzatnagar and Varanasi Divisions remained unrebutted.

Consequently, the Tribunal directed the respondents to reconsider the impugned seniority and promotion decisions by applying paragraph 302 read with paragraph 303(a), with due consideration to the applicants’ first-batch training and first-attempt success.

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

The connected miscellaneous applications were also disposed of, and the parties were directed to bear their own costs.