SC/ST candidates qualifying on general standards must be adjusted against unreserved vacancies in promotional select lists.

The applicant, a Technician Grade-I belonging to the Scheduled Caste (SC) category in the Eastern Railway, challenged his exclusion from a provisional select list dated 25.06.2020 for the post of Senior Technician

The list identified 41 vacancies (UR: 34, SC: 5, ST: 2)

The applicant contended that six SC candidates who appeared in the top 34 positions of the list should have been adjusted against Unreserved (UR) posts based on their seniority/merit, which would have vacated SC-reserved slots for candidates like himself

In a previous round of litigation (O.A. 1083/2022), the Tribunal directed the respondents to decide the applicant's representation in light of a specific communication from the Principal Chief Personnel Officer (PCPO) dated 11.08.2021

The respondents subsequently issued an order on 02.01.2023 rejecting the claim, asserting that the 2020 list was prepared per RBE No. 91/2018 and that the 11.08.2021 circular was only applied prospectively to subsequent suitability tests

Aggrieved by this, the applicant filed the instant application

1. Whether the respondent authority complied with the Tribunal’s earlier direction to consider the applicant's representation specifically in light of the PCPO communication dated 11.08.2021

2. Whether the selection process for the 25.06.2020 list erroneously exhausted reserved quotas by including merit-standard SC candidates within the reserved category

Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985

Internal policy of the Eastern Railway as articulated in the Principal Chief Personnel Officer’s (PCPO) Letter No. E.220/0/2/RR/Pt-XVII dated 11.08.2021, which mandates that SC/ST candidates who qualify by general standards and fall within the normal zone of consideration must be adjusted against UR vacancies

Transition of reservation policies from RBE No. 126/2010 to RBE No. 91/2018 regarding the treatment of reserved category candidates in unreserved posts

The Tribunal observed that while the respondents claimed the select list of 25.06.2020 was governed by RBE No. 91/2018, they failed to produce said RBE or Circular No. 124/2018 before the Bench

Crucially, the Tribunal noted that its previous order in O.A. 1083/2022 had explicitly directed the authorities to evaluate the applicant’s grievance specifically through the lens of the 11.08.2021 PCPO communication

Upon reviewing the respondent’s speaking order dated 02.01.2023, the Tribunal found that the Senior Divisional Personnel Officer had bypassed this directive by treating the 2021 circular as applicable only to future selections, despite the judicial instruction to apply it to the applicant's pending representation

The Tribunal concluded that the respondents failed to fulfill their legal obligation to comply with the specific terms of the prior court order

The court remitted the matter back to the Senior Divisional Personnel Officer, Eastern Railway, Howrah, with a strict direction to reconsider the applicant’s representation dated 23.05.2022 in terms of the PCPO letter dated 11.08.2021

The respondents were ordered to issue a fresh, reasoned, and speaking order within six weeks of receiving the certified copy of the judgment

No costs were awarded