Facts
The applicant was initially engaged as a Volunteer/Mobile Booking Clerk (MBC) in 1983 and was subsequently disengaged.
Source reference: no citationUnder Railway Board Circular RBE No. 24/90 dated 06.02.1990, MBCs disengaged due to discontinuance of the scheme could be re-engaged. The applicant was accordingly re-engaged on 02.09.1990.
Source reference: p.2Railway Board policy permitted consideration of MBCs for absorption against regular vacancies if they possessed the minimum qualification prescribed for direct recruits and had completed at least three years of service.
Source reference: p.2The applicant was screened for regularization in 1994 but was not included in the panel.
Source reference: p.2His claim was rejected by letter dated 10.07.2014 on the ground that he had not passed High School with English as a subject, as required under paragraph 126 of the 1968 edition of the Indian Railway Establishment Manual (IREM).
Source reference: pp.2, 4–5The applicant had earlier approached the Tribunal in OA No. 246/2012, pursuant to which the respondents were directed to consider his claim. Following rejection of the claim, he filed the present Original Application challenging the decision dated 10.07.2014.
Source reference: p.2Issues
1. Whether the respondents were justified in applying the educational qualification prescribed under paragraph 126 of the 1968 edition of the IREM, namely Matriculation with English as a compulsory subject, while considering the applicant’s regularization.
Source reference: pp.3, 4–52. Whether the applicant’s claim for regularization was required to be assessed under the revised educational qualification prescribed in paragraph 128 of the 1989 edition of the IREM, which was in force when he was re-engaged and screened in 1994.
Source reference: pp.3, 53. Whether the decision dated 10.07.2014 rejecting the applicant’s regularization claim was liable to be quashed and reconsidered with effect from the date on which similarly situated MBCs were regularized.
Source reference: pp.1, 6–7Law Applied
The Tribunal applied Railway Board’s scheme dated 21.04.1982, under which Volunteer/Mobile Booking Clerks could be considered for absorption against regular vacancies if they possessed the minimum qualification prescribed for direct recruits and had completed three years of service.
Source reference: p.6It also considered RBE No. 119/85 dated 20.04.1985 and RBE No. 24/90 dated 06.02.1990, which extended consideration for regularization and permitted re-engagement of eligible disengaged MBCs.
Source reference: p.2Under paragraph 126 of the IREM, 1968, Commercial Clerks were required to have Matriculation with English as a compulsory subject, whereas paragraph 128 of the IREM, 1989 prescribed Matriculation or an equivalent examination with not less than 50% aggregate marks and omitted the English-subject requirement.
Source reference: pp.4–5The Tribunal held that the qualification in force at the time of the applicant’s re-engagement and screening was the relevant qualification.
Source reference: no citationIt further held that A.P. Pandey v. Union of India & Others, OA No. 4109/2016, which relied only on the 1968 qualification, was rendered per incuriam because it failed to consider the revised 1989 IREM provision and was therefore not binding on the Division Bench.
Source reference: pp.5–6Reasoning
The respondents rejected the applicant solely because he lacked English as a subject in his High School qualification.
Source reference: pp.4–5Although that requirement existed under paragraph 126 of the 1968 IREM, it had been expressly removed by the revised paragraph 128 in the 1989 edition, which was operative when the applicant was re-engaged in 1990 and screened in 1994.
Source reference: p.5The Tribunal therefore found that the respondents had incorrectly applied the superseded qualification.
Source reference: no citationThe Railway Board’s requirement that MBCs possess the qualification prescribed for direct recruits had to be assessed by reference to the qualification in force when the applicant’s eligibility was considered, not by reference to the obsolete 1968 provision.
Source reference: no citationThe contrary reasoning in A.P. Pandey was distinguished and treated as per incuriam because it did not consider the 1989 amendment.
Source reference: pp.5–6Holding
The Tribunal allowed the Original Application and quashed the respondents’ order dated 10.07.2014.
The respondents were directed to reconsider the applicant’s regularization under the educational qualification prescribed in paragraph 128 of the IREM, 1989, with effect from the date on which the services of other MBCs were regularized pursuant to the 1994 screening, and to extend consequential benefits within three months of receiving the certified copy of the order.
Source reference: p.7The associated Miscellaneous Applications were disposed of, and the parties were directed to bear their own costs.
Source reference: p.7Original Court PDF
Ram Kumar YadavvsUnion Of India
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
![Regularization screening must apply the educational qualifications in force when screening occurred.. Ram Kumar Yadav vs Union Of India. CAT - ['Lucknow']. LawLens](/stories/thumbnails/regularization-screening-must-apply-the-educational-qualifications-in-force-when-screening-9f2472baf0e343a6bc64e0be43f59a34.webp)