Patna High Court
Smt. Archana Kumari vs The Union Of India on 20 December, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.14516 of 2021
======================================================
Smt. Archana Kumari, 47 Years, Wife of Shri Avinash Kumar, resident of
Mohalla- Nayatola Saguna, P.O. and P.S.-Danapur Cantt, Distt.-Patna, Ex-
Substitute Commercial Clerk, E.C. Railway, Danapur.
... ... Petitioner/Applicant
Versus
1. The Union of India through General Manager, E.C. Railway, Hajipur.
2. The General Manager (Personnel), E.C. Railway, Hajipur.
3. The Divisional Railway Manager, E.C. Railway, Danapur.
4. The Addl. Divisional Railway Manager, E.C. Railway, Danapur.
5. The Divisional Railway Manager (P), E.C. Railway, Danapur.
6. The Sr. Divisional Commercial Manager, E.C. Railway, Danapur.
... ... Respondents
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Shekhar Singh with Ms. Shruti Sinha,
Mr. Sumit Kumar, Advocates
For the U.O.I. (Railway) : Mr. Abbas Haider, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN
SINGH
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD
ORAL JUDGMENT
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN
SINGH)
Date : 20-12-2021
Heard the parties.
2. The petitioner has assailed an order dated 28.03.2019
passed in O.A. No. 050/00173/2015 by the Central
Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench, whereby the petitioner's
application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals
Act, 1985 has been rejected. The petitioner had approached the
Tribunal seeking a direction to the Respondent railway
Patna High Court CWJC No.14516 of 2021 dt.20-12-2021
authorities to regularize her service as Commercial Clerk in the
manner services of other similarly situate substitutes have been
regularized. She had also sought a direction to grant further
engagement as Commercial Clerk for the post, against which,
she was working, till filling of the post on regular basis.
3. Upon perusal of the impugned order and the facts
pleaded in the writ application and the counter affidavit, it
appears that the basic facts are not at all in dispute. The
petitioner was provisionally appointed as Substitute Commercial
Clerk in the pay scale of Rs. 3200/-4900/- for a period of six
months, pursuant to Railway Board's letter dated 18.07.2008,
without following any process of selection. There is reference in
the impugned order of the Tribunal, "Minister's quota", against
which the petitioner was engaged.
4. The Tribunal, in its judgment, has noted the fact that
the petitioner was engaged on provisional basis without
adhering to any transparent selection process. Further, the order
by which the petitioner was engaged clearly mentioned that
even successful completion of training will not give the
petitioner any right for her continuation or regularization or
absorption against the said post. The Tribunal, further
concluded that the petitioner did not have any right to claim
Patna High Court CWJC No.14516 of 2021 dt.20-12-2021
further engagement or regularization or absorption on the basis
of her engagement once for six months.
5. The Tribunal finally concluded in paragraph No. 13 as
under :-
"In the light of above observations, we direct the
respondents to consider the case of the applicant
for extension of her engagement as Substitute
Commercial Clerk in accordance with the rules
and instructions in the matter and observations
made in this order, if similarly placed persons
have been allowed such benefit and if the post
against which the applicant was working, is still
vacant and requirement of job permits. This
exercise shall be completed by passing a
reasoned and speaking order within a period of
four months from the date of receipt/production
of a copy of this order. The applicant is also
directed to submit a copy of this order along
with a copy of the O.A. to the concerned
respondent authority within fifteen days from the
date of receipt of certified copy of the order."
6. Mr. Shekhar Singh, learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioner has argued that services of similarly
situate persons have been regularized. He has referred by way of
illustration, case of one Rajesh Ranjan whose name figures in
the impugned order of the Tribunal. The contention, in this
Patna High Court CWJC No.14516 of 2021 dt.20-12-2021
regard, advanced on behalf of the petitioner before the Tribunal
has been duly considered and rejected.
7. Be that as it may, since the initial engagement of the
petitioner itself appears to be in clear violation of constitutional
mandate, we are not inclined to take a different view than what
has been taken by the Central Administrative Tribunal in the
impugned judgment and order. We do not find any merit in this
case. This application is, accordingly, rejected.
(Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J)
( Madhuresh Prasad, J)
shyambihari/-
AFR/NAFR
CAV DATE
Uploading Date 23.12.2021
Transmission Date
