Central Administrative Tribunal

TISHA GEHLOT vs M/O RAILWAYS on 4 November 2026

Cites 0, Cited by 0

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

Cited by

0

Decisions in the index citing it

Cites

0

Decisions referred to

In this index

0

Of the decisions it cites

Overruled / Questioned

0

No negative treatment found

Loading the citing and cited decisions…

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK Order Sheet Item no.: 46 O.A./564/2026 (CUTTACK) [ APPOINTMENT/ RECRUITMENT ] With M.A./534/2026 Court No.: 1 No of Adjournment: 2 Order Dated: 04/11/2026 TISHA GEHLOT Vs M/O RAILWAYS

For Applicant(s) Advocate : T.S.Swaraj

For Respondent(s) Advocate : B.R.Rath Order of The Tribunal This matter is posted today for considering the ad interim relief prayed for by the applicant in this OA to the extent that respondents be directed to keep One (1) post vacant for both category 4 and 5 under Non-Technical Popular Categories (Graduate) as per the Employment Notice No. CEN 05/2024.

2. Her case in nutshell is that she belongs to OBC category. Pursuant to Centralized Employment Notice (CEN) No. 05/2024 dated 13.09.2024, issued by the Respondents for recruitment to various posts under the Non-Technical Popular Categories (NTP?), she submitted online application for Category Nos. 1, 3, 4 and 5, furnishing her preference in the order of Category Nos. 1, 5, 4 and

3. She participated in the recruitment process and successfully cleared the requisite stages prescribed for consideration against Category Nos. 4 and 5. Respondents proceeded for document verification and Medical Examination process in respect of Category Nos. 1 and 3. She did not participate in the said process as she was eligible for Category No. 3 posts only and was desirous of competing for the Category Nos. 4 and 5 posts rather than for Category No. 3. The respondents again issued notification for verification of documents and medical examination of candidates for category nos. 4 and 5 with stipulation that candidates, who had already been invited for Document Verification and Medical Examination in connection with Category Nos. 1 and 3 vide notification dt. 07.05.2026, were not to be invited to undergo Document Verification and Medical Examination afresh for Categories and and their candidature/empanelment would be considered on the basis of their earlier Document Verification and Medical Examination. Her name did not find place in the subsequent notification despite having successfully qualified all requisite examinations, which is highlyillegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. In this OA her prayer is as under: “…….Respondents may be directed to consider the candidature of Applicant for the post falling under Category 4 and 5 under Government of India, Ministry of Railways, Railway Recruitment Boards (Bhubaneswar)'s Centralised Employment Notice no. CEN 05/2024 for Non Technical Popular Categories (Graduate) posts and be directed to conduct Document Verification and Medical Examination of the Applicant and if found suitable, the Applicant be considered for appointment as per preference given by her for the post of Category 4 or 5 with all consequential benefits.”

3. Vide order dated 12.10.2026, respondents were given opportunity to file their reply to the ad interim prayer made by the applicant in the OA. According, they have filed their reply objecting and contesting grant of any ad interim relief. According to the respondents, it is fact that the RRB published a Notice on 07.05.2026 indicating the Roll Numbers of eligible candidates required to appear for Document Verification and Medical Examination, wherein the Roll Number of the Applicant was included, giving the candidates to understand that the candidates remaining absent from Document Verification and Medical Examination would forfeit their candidature. Further, it was stipulated in the said notice that "Final recommendation of a candidate to a particular post from Category No.1 to 5 and zonal Railways will be done after publishing of the final result of computer based typing skill test (Qualified/Not qualified)as per merit cum preference in accordance to their qualifying status in CBTST and medical fitness of the candidates”. The applicant was intimated vide Letter dated 16.05.2026 to participate in the process of document verification giving the clear date and time therein, and, thus, she ought to have attended document verification and Medical Examination on the date and time fixed in the intimation letter sent to her since she herself had opted for the posts under Category Nos. 1 and 3 in her online application but she failed to appear for document verification either on 28.05.2026 or 22.06.2026. Hence, her candidature was cancelled upon failure to appear at the document verification despite opportunities given to her. Therefore, she does not have any right to claim consideration of her case once again pursuant to the second notice meant for others.

4. No reply has been filed by the applicant to the reply/objection filed by the respondents.

5. Heard.

6. Ld. Counsel for the parties have reiterated their stand point gist of which have been noted above.

7. It is clear from the facts mentioned above that the applicant was given opportunity to appear at the document verification process but she did not avail the opportunity. If, she was having any grievance relating to her appearing at the verification process as noticed to her, she ought to have intimated to the authority concerned instead of abandoning herself from the process of document verification. According to respondents, due to her non-participation in the verification process despite due intimation, they have cancelled her candidature and, in the said circumstances, cancellation of her selection is declared void in the final adjudication, she does not have any right to pray by way of ad interim order to allow her to participate in the selection or to keep one post vacant in both the categories 4 and 5 pending final adjudication of the lis. Hence, prima facie, we see no justification to grant the ad interim relief prayed for in this OA, which is accordingly rejected. However, it is made clear that the respondents while issuing the offer of appointment to the last candidates under Category 4 and 5 should specifically indicate in the offer of appointment that their appointment shall be subject to the final outcome of this OA No. 564/2026.

8. List this matter on 22.01.2027 awaiting completion of pleadings.

9. Copy of this order be given to Ld. Counsel for both the parties. Pramod Kumar Das Member (A) SUDHI RANJAN MISHRA Member (J)

Ravi Kumar ( ps )

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead