Prakash Chandra Biswal vs EAST COAST RAILWAY on 12 November 2026

O R D E R

Mr. Sudhi Ranjan Mishra, Member, J.M.

The applicant challenging the order dated 01.06.2022 passed by Respondent No. 3 wherein his prayer for antedating his posting at par with other candidates of the panel was rejected has filed this OA praying for following reliefs: a) To quash the order of rejection dtd. 01.06.2022 under Ann. A/10. b) And to direct the respondents to antedate the appointment of the applicant at par with other candidates of notification dated 17.12.2010. c) And to direct the respondents to grant all consequential and financial benefits. d) And pass any other order as this Hon’ble Tribunal deems fit and proper in the interest of justice.

2. The fact of the case as inter alia averred statedby the applicant in the OA is as follows:

Kalpeswar Behera

2.1 That, the applicant came across the employment notice No.ECOR/ RRC/ D/ 2010 dtd.17.12.2010 issued by Respondent No.2 for the post of Trackman, Token Porter, Gate Keeper & Helper-II in PB-I of Rs.5200-20200/- with Grade Pay of Rs.1800/ in the divisions and workshop of East Coast Railway. As per Para-1 of the detail notification the total vacancy was 2817 and the medical standard prescribed for each category of post i.e., B-1 for Trackman, Aye-2 for Token Porter, A-3 for Gate Keeper and B- 1 for Helper-II. 2.2 That, the applicant had applied for the post of Trackman, Token Porter, Gate Keeper and Helper-II and was issued admit card by the Respondent No.2 to appear in the written test and came out success, for which he was called to appear in the PET on 30.10.2012. On being success in the PET was called for verification of documents. After such verification of documents the applicant was subjected to medical examination and was sent to Railway Hospital, Khurda Road for medical examination wherein he was declared fit in A-2 category. However, on receipt of complaint on the medical report of the Railway Hospital, Khurda Road, the applicant along with some others were again subjected to re medical examination at Railway Hospital,

Kalpeswar Behera

Mancheswar who after medical examination declared the applicant fit in B-1 category. In view of the contradictory report, the applicant was subjected to re medical examination at Railway Hospital Waltair who upon medical examination, reported the applicant fit in B-1 category. Finally, the candidature of the applicant was rejected and the order of rejection dtd.30.10.2013 was subject matter before this Hon'ble Tribunal in O.A.No.909/2013. 2.3 That, this Hon'ble Tribunal was pleased to issue notice to the Respondents in the Original Application. The Respondents after receiving notices issued from this Hon'ble Tribunal entered their appearance and filed counter. The Original Application No.909/2013 was taken up for hearing and finally this Hon'ble Tribunal was pleased to disposed of the Original Application with observation and direction on 29.09.2015. The observation and direction passed in Ο.Α.Νο.909/2013 is quoted below; "xxx. In view of the above, we quash the impugned order dated 30.10.2013 in so far as finding fault with the applicant and thereby discarding him from railway service and in so far as appointment of the applicant is concerned, we leave it to the

Kalpeswar Behera respondents to examine the eligibility of the applicant for getting the appointment with the fitness in B-1 category and communicate the decision to him in a well reasoned order." 2.4 That, the Respondent No.2 vide speaking order dtd. 19.11.2015 was pleased to complied the order of this Hon'ble Tribunal dtd.29.09.2015. From the speaking order dtd.19.11.2015 it is clear that the Respondent No.2 treated himself as Appellate Authority of this Hon'ble Tribunal and examine the order of this Hon'ble Tribunal on merit. Further, instead of complying the order of this Hon'ble Tribunal in its letter and spirit is pleased to turn down the candidature of the applicant again by giving findings against the findings of this Hon'ble Tribunal in order dtd.19.11.2015. The findings of Respondent No.2 in the speaking order is deliberate and intentional not to provide employment to the applicant in compliance to order dtd. 19.11.2015 as because the same passed by Tribunal in Ο.Α.Νο.909/ 2013. 2.5 That, the order of rejection dtd. 19.11.2015 was subject matter before this Hon'ble Tribunal in O.A.No.290/ 2016. This

Kalpeswar Behera

Hon'ble Tribunal vide order dtd.09.09.2019 has disposed of the Original Application with the following direction; "6. In the circumstances as discussed above, the OA is disposed of with a direction to the respondents/ competent authority to reconsider the case of the applicant for a post of B-I medical category if he had applied for the same and if his name can be included in the merit list as per the marks secured by him provided all posts as per the advertisement had not been filled up in the recruitment. It is made clear that the case of the applicant cannot be rejected for the ground that he had tried to mislead the medical authorities in view of the discussions earlier. The decision taken by the Respondents is to be communicated to the applicant through a speaking order within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order." 2.6 That, in compliance to order dtd.09.09.2019 passed in Ο.Α.Νο.290/2016, the Respondent No.4 vide letter dtd.19.02.2020 has forwarded the candidature of the applicant for posting as a Track Maintainer-IV to Respondent No.3. The Respondent No.3 vide office order No. Sr.DPO/ Rectt./ Gr.- D/June/2020/96 dtd.08.06.2020 has issued the order of

Kalpeswar Behera appointment as Track Maintainer-IV in Engineering Department in Level-I as per 7th CPC. Further, Respondent No.4 vide office order No. P/ Engg./ 42/2020 dtd. 10.06.2020 has posted the applicant as Track Maintainer-IV in Level-1 under SSE (PW)/ Talcher and he has joined in the said post accordingly. 2.7 That the it is humbly and respectfully submitted here thatadmittedly the applicant was a candidate for the notification dtd.27.12.2010, qualified in the written and PET Test but due tofaulty decision of the department, he was have denied further participation in the process of selection along with other candidates. The decision of Respondent No.4 was subject before this Hon'ble tribunal in O.A.No.610 of 2013, O.A.No.909 of 2013, & O.A.No.290 of2016. Hence, the delay in appointment is purely attributable on part of the department for which the applicant should not allowed to be suffer by fixing the date of his appointment as 10.06.2020. It is pertinent to mention here that other candidates those who are selected along with the applicant have already promoted to Track Maintainer-III and their name in the seniority list appears in the category of Track Maintainer-III. Further, other recruits appointed in Railway in pursuance to other notifications issued by the East Coast Railway much later

Kalpeswar Behera than the notification dtd.27.12.2010 are also placed above the applicant for which in the Seniority list, for which my date of appointment should be antedated at par with other recruits of notification dtd.27.12.2010 with all consequential and financial benefits. The applicant has already submitted an exhaustive appeal ventilating his grievance with a prayer to antedate his date of appointment at par with other recruits of notification dtd.27.12.2010 with all consequential and financial benefits. 2.8 That, the applicant being aggrieved with the inaction on part of Respondent No.2 to 4 in not taking any action on his appeal dtd.22.12.2021 without finding any other alternative remedy constrained to approach this Hon'ble Tribunal by filing Original Application No.260/00148 of 2022 Under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act 1985. This Hon'ble Tribunal vide order dtd.07.04.2022 has disposed of the Original Application and directed the Respondent No.3 to dispose of the representation by way of passing speaking and reasoned order. 2.9 That, in compliance to order dtd.07.04.2022 the Respondent No.3 has disposed of the Original Application vide speaking dtd.01.06.2022 and rejected the prayer to antedate his

Kalpeswar Behera

appointment at par with other candidates of the panel. In the speaking order the Respondent No.3 has pointed out that the applicant is a OBC candidate and no OBC candidate junior to him appointed as Track Maintainer during the intervene period. Further, ground taken that parity of an interpolated candidate can only be provided regarding service benefits (Seniority, Fixation of Pay etc.) with his immediate juniors and not with his seniors. 2.10 That, it is the specific case of the applicant that the Respondent No.3 in his speaking order neither denied nor disputed the allegation leveled against the departmental authorities in the representation dtd.22.12.2021 regarding the delay in providing appointment. It is respectfully stated that as the delay is fully attributable on part of the Respondents in providing appointment to this applicant after 7 years than his normal due i.e., like other candidates of the panel, his appointment should be antedated with all consequential benefits. 2.11 That, the applicant being aggrieved with the order of rejection dtd.01.06.2022 on part of the Respondent No.3 without

Kalpeswar Behera finding any other alternative remedy constrained to approach this Hon'ble Tribunal by filing this Original Application.

3. The respondents have filed their counter stating as follows: 3.1 That Railway Recruitment Cell (RRC), Bhubaneswar had issued Notification vide Employment Notice No. ECOR/RRC/D/2010 dated 17.12.2010 under Annexure-A/1 to O.A, for recruitment of 2817 erstwhile Group 'D' posts in Pay Band-1 of Rs. 5200-20200 having GP Rs. 1800/- for the posts of Token Porter, Gate Keeper, Trackman and Helper-II. A candidate has to be fit in A-2 medical standard to be posted as Token Porter, provided he is otherwise eligible for the post. Similarly, A- 3 Medical standard for the post of Gate keeper and B-1 medical standard for both the posts of Trackman and Helper-II have been prescribed.There are 4 Lakh applications were received against the above notification. Written test was conducted for eligible candidates during the period of May-June 2012. Physical Efficiency Test (PET) was conducted for the written qualified candidates during October 2012. Document verification and medical examination was held for the PET qualified candidates during December'2012 and January 2013. Final Panel has been

Kalpeswar Behera published and the recruitment exercise has been completed and closed on 25.06.2014. 3.2 Based on the performance in the written examination and PET, the Applicant, Sri Prakash Chandra Biswal with Roll No.9008318, was called for document verification on 12.12.2012. After document verification, he was directed to Railway Hospital, Khurda Road for medical examination. The concerned Medical authority declared him fit in A-2 category.

However, subsequently there were some complaints on medical examination and as per the advice of the Vigilance Department of this railway, he was medically re-examined at Railway Hospital, Mancheswar. On re-medical examination, the Medical authority of Central Hospital, Mancheswar did not agree with the medical fitness certified earlier by Khurda Road Division. Since the findings of both the medical tests differed, he was further sent for re-medical examination at Divisional Railway Hospital, Waltair. The Medical Authority of Waltair Division also did not agree with the fitness certificate issued by Khurda Road Division while agreeing with the finding of the Central Hospital, Mancheswar. From the above, it was established beyond doubt that the candidate Sri Prakash Chandra Biswal with Roll No.9008318 was

Kalpeswar Behera not fit in A-2 medical category. The Vigilance Department in its findings concluded that, the Applicant, Sri Prakash Chandra Biswal was involved in the case for issuance of false medical certificate. He had tried to mislead the examining Doctor during his medical examination at Railway Hospital, Khurda Road with malafide intention. Such an act, before entering into Railway Service was viewed seriously so as to deter other candidates who are joining railway service candidature was cancelled as per Para 14(ii) read with Para14(ii)(g) of the Employment Notification No.ECOR/RRC/D/2010 dt 17-12-2010 being found guilty of "Using unfair means during medical examination" and the same was communicated to the Applicant vide Railway's letter No. ECoR/RRC/D/2010/DV dated 29.07.2013. 3.3 It is pertinent to mention here that, the Applicant had opted his 1ª choice for the post of 'Token Porter' for which the desired medical standard is A-2. And hence, by way of some malafide intention he had tried to acquire the A-2 Medical Certificate which was subsequently established by the Vigilance inquiry. So, the rejection letter dated 29.07.2013 was sent to the Applicant as per the terms and conditions of the notification. Aggrieved with the rejection letter dated 29.07.2013, the applicant filed an OA

Kalpeswar Behera

No 610/13 before Hon'ble CAT/Cuttack which was disposed of by the Hon'ble Tribunal at the admission stage with a direction to the respondent to dispose the fresh appeal of the applicant and his appeal was disposed off vide Railway's letter No. ECOR/RRC/D/2010/DV dated 30.10.2013 under Annexure-A/2 to O.A rejecting the candidature of the Applicant being devoid of any merit. Again aggrieved with the disposal letter dated 30.10.2013 in obedience of Hon'ble Tribunal's order, the applicant had filed another OA No 909/2013 before Hon'ble CAT/Cuttack. Hon'ble Tribunal, while disposing the OA passed an order dated 29.09.2015 under Annexure-A/3 to O.A and left it to the respondents to "examine the eligibility of the applicant" for getting appointment with the fitness in B-1 medical category. As per order of the Hon'ble Tribunal, the respondent examined the case in detail with the available rules and regulations pertaining to the said recruitment and passed an order dated 19.11.2015 under Annexure-A/4 to O.A duly rejecting his candidature against the said recruitment. 3.4 Being aggrieved with the disposal letter, the applicant had filed a Contempt Petition C.P.No. 10/16 dated 29.03.2016 before

Kalpeswar Behera the Hon'ble Tribunal Cuttack. Hon'ble Tribunal had heard the CP and observed no case of contempt and the CP was rejected. 3.5 There after the applicant had again filed an OA No. 290/2016 before the Hon'ble Tribunal challenging the order dated 19.11.2015 issued by the respondent. Hon'ble Central Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack disposed of the OA No. 260/290/2016 vide order dated 09.09.2019 under Annexure-A/5 to O.A with a direction to the respondents/competent authority to reconsider the case of the applicant for a post of B-1 medical category if he had applied for the same and if his name can be included in the merit list as per the marks secured by him provided all posts as per the advertisement had not been filled up in the recruitment. The decision taken by the respondents is to be communicated to the applicant through a speaking order within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.The Railway administration has considered the case and implement the order as under: "The Final panel against the employment Notice No. ECOR/RRC/D/2010 dt 17-12-2010 has already been published. All the recruitment exercises pertaining to the said recruitment

Kalpeswar Behera were completed on 25.06.2014 and hence, closed. However, all the posts of B-1 medical category were not filled up. Some vacancies in Trackman (now re-designated as Track Maintainer IV) category were remained unfilled. Hence, it is decided to provide the petitioner to appoint as Track Maintainer IV as the applicant had completed the recruitment process and declared suitable for the post of Trackman re-designated as Track Maintainer - IV against the aforesaid employment Notice." 3.6 Thereafter, the applicant was recruited and posted in the post of Track Maintainer-IV under Senior Section Engineer (Permanent Way), Talcher in Engineering department of Khurda Road Division, being fit in B-1 medical standard, vide Office Order No.Sr.DPO/Rectt/Gr.-D/June/2020/96 dated 08.06.2020 under Annexure-A/6 to O.A and Office

Order

No.P/Engg/42/2020 dt.10.06.2020 under Annexure-A/7 to O.A in reference to Chairman, Railway Recruitment Cell, Bhubaneswar's Lr.No. ECOR/RRC/D/2010/Panel/CC dt.19.02.2020.After 2 years of appointment, the Applicant has filed the O.A No.148 of 2022 with prayers to direct the Respondents to antedate the appointment of the applicant at par with other candidates of notification dtd.17.12.2010 and to direct

Kalpeswar Behera the Respondents to grant all consequential and financial benefits which was disposed of at admission stage by Hon'ble Tribunal on 07.04.2022 under Annexure-A/9 to O.A with direction to Respondent No.3/Competent authority to dispose of the representation of the applicant dated 22.12.2021 under Annexure-4/8, in accordance with law by way of passing a speaking and reasoned order to be communicated to the applicant within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. And in adherence to the Hon'ble Tribunal's directives the competent authority has issued speaking order vide No.P/CC/5003/O.A No.148/2022/PCB/Engg. dated. 01.06.2022 under Annexure-A/10 to O.Α. 3.7 That it is humbly submitted that, based on the performance in the written examination and PET, the Applicant, Sri Prakash Chandra Biswal with Roll No.9008318, was called for document verification on 12.12.2012. After document verification, he was directed to Railway Hospital, Khurda Road for medical examination. The concerned Medical authority declared him fit in A-2 category. However, subsequently there were some complaints on medical examination and as per the advice of the Vigilance Department of this railway, he was medically re-

Kalpeswar Behera

examined at Railway Hospital, Mancheswar. On re-medical examination, the Medical authority of Central Hospital, Mancheswar did not agree with the medical fitness certified earlier by Khurda Road Division. Since the findings of both the medical tests differed, he was further sent for re-medical examination at Divisional Railway Hospital, Waltair. Medical Authority of Waltair Division also did not agree with the fitness certificate issued by Khurda Road Division while agreeing with the finding of the Central Hospital, Mancheswar. From the above, it was established beyond doubt that the candidate Sri Prakash Chandra Biswal with Roll No.9008318 was not fit in A-2 medical category. 3.8 The Vigilance Department in its findings concluded that, the Applicant, Sri Prakash Chandra Biswal was involved in the case for issuance of false medical certificate. He had tried to mislead the examining Doctor during his medical examination at Railway Hospital, Khurda Road with malafide intention. Such an act, before entering into Railway Service was viewed seriously so as to deter other candidates who are joining railway service from taking undue advantage by acts of fraud. As such his candidature was cancelled as per Para 14 (ii) read with

Kalpeswar Behera

Para14(ii)(g) of the Employment Notification No.ECOR/RRC/D/2010 dt 17-12-2010 under Annexure-A/1 to O.A being found guilty of "Using unfair means during medical examination" and malin the same was communicated to the Applicant vide Railway's letter No. ECOR/RRC/D/2010/DV dated 29.07.2013.It is pertinent to mention here that, the Applicant had opted his 1 choice for the post of 'Token Porter' for which the desired medical standard is A-2. And hence, by way of some malafide intention he had tried to acquire the A-2 Medical Certificate which was subsequently established by the Vigilance inquiry. So, the rejection letter dated 29.07.2013 Applicant as per the terms and conditions of the notification. 3.9 Aggrieved with the rejection letter dated 29.07.2013 the applicant filed an OA No 610/13 before Hon'ble CAT/Cuttack which was disposed of by the Hon'ble Tribunal at the admission stage with a direction to the respondent to dispose the fresh appeal of the applicant and his appeal was disposed off vide Railway's letter No. ECOR/RRC/D/2010/DV dated 30.10.2013 under Annexure-A/2 to O.A rejecting the candidature of the Applicant being devoid of any merit.

Kalpeswar Behera

3.10 That, it is humbly submitted that, the petitioner does not appear to have interpreted the directive of the Hon'ble Tribunal on 29-09-2015 under Annexure-A/3 to O.A in O.A no. 909/2013. The Hon'ble Tribunal was pleased to provide: "In so far as appointment of the applicant is concerned, we leave it to the respondents to examine the eligibility of the applicant for getting the appointment with the fitness in B-1 category and communicate the decision to him in a well reasoned order". 3.11 The Respondent has followed the directive of the Hon'ble Tribunal in letter and spirit. The eligibility of the applicant was examined in detail in the context of Vigilance complaint and it ought to have been done so. There were varying medical fitness reports from different Hospitals. And the petitioner had never disclosed about him meeting with an accident that he claims to have affected his eyes earlier during his deposition before the Vigilance Department, nor while undertaking before the medical examination. Further, disciplinary action taken against the medical officials of Khurda Road Division against this case established deliberate wrong doing on the part of the Petitioner.

Kalpeswar Behera

3.12 The respondent has acted remaining in his official bounds and as per the directive of the Hon'ble Tribunal in OA no. 909/2013. He has not assumed any authority not due to him as wrongfully alleged by the Petitioner, for which, he is not to be made party for any Contempt of Court. In fact, the Hon'ble Tribunal has been pleased to reject the Contempt Petition C.P. No. 10/16 filed by the petitioner and rightly so. 3.13 That it is humbly submitted that, the Hon'ble Central Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack disposed of the OA No. 290/2016 vide order dated 09.09.2019 under Annexure-A/5 to O.A with a direction to the respondents/competent authority to reconsider the case of the applicant for a post of B-1 medical category if he had applied for same and if his name can be included in the merit list as per the marks secured by him provided all posts as per the advertisement had not been filled up in the recruitment. The decision taken by the respondents is to be communicated to the applicant through a speaking order within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

Kalpeswar Behera

3.14 In adherence to this Hon'ble Tribunal's directives the 2023 railway administration has considered the case and implement the order as under: "The Final panel against the employment Notice No. ECOR/RRC/D/2010 dt 17-12-2010 has already been published. All the recruitment exercises pertaining to the said recruitment were completed on 25.06.2014 and hence, closed. However, all the posts of B-1 medical category were not filled up. Some vacancies in Trackman (now re-designated as Track Maintainer - IV) category were remained unfilled. Hence, it is decided to provide the petitioner to appoint as Track Maintainer - IV as the applicant had completed the recruitment process and declared suitable for the post of Trackman re-designated as Track Maintainer - IV against the aforesaid employment Notice." 3.15 Thereafter, the applicant was recruited and posted in the post of Track Maintainer IV under Senior Section Engineer (Permanent Way), Talcher in Engineering department of Khurda Road Division, being fit in B-1 medical standard, vide Office Order No.Sr.DPO/Rectt/Gr.-D/June/2020/96 dated 08.06.2020 mathithunder Annexure-A/6 to O.A and Office

Order

Kalpeswar Behera

No.P/Engg/42/2020 dt.10.06.2020 under Annexure-A/7 to O.A in reference to Chairman, Railway Recruitment Cell, Bhubaneswar's Lr.No. ECOR/RRC/D/2010/Panel/CC dt.19.02.2020. 3.16 That it is submitted that, the OA No. 909/2013 filed before the Hon'ble Tribunal was heard and disposed off by the Hon'ble Tribunal on 29/09/2015 under Annexure-A/3 to O.A with a direction to the respondents to examine the eligibility of the applicant for getting the appointment with the fitness in B-1 category and communicate the decision to him in a well order. Hon'ble Tribunal's order was complied by issuing a well reasoned speaking order to the applicant vide letter dated 19.11.2015 under Annexure-A/4 to O.A. Being dissatisfied with the speaking order, the applicant has filed a contempt petition CP No. 10/16 alleging non-compliance of the order dated 29.09.2015. The CP No.10/16 was heard by the Hon'ble Tribunal and observed no case of contempt and accordingly the CP was rejected. So, violation of Hon'ble Tribunal's order as alleged by the petitioner is not true and the allegation of faulty decision has no merit in the case. The applicant was provided the benefits as per rule and

Kalpeswar Behera practice. As such, the delay is not attributable on the part of the Respondents. 3.17 That it is humbly submitted that, after 2 years of appointment, the Applicant has filed the O.A No.148 of 2022 with prayers to direct the Respondents to antedate the appointment of the applicant at par with other candidates of notification dtd. 17.12.2010 and to direct the Respondents to grant all consequential and financial benefits, which was disposed of at admission stage by Hon'ble Tribunal on 07.04.2022 under Annexure-A/9 to O.A with direction to Respondent No.3/Competent authority to dispose of the representation of the applicant dated 22.12.2021 under Annexure-A/8, in accordance with law by way of passing a speaking and reasoned order to be communicated to the applicant within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. And in adherence to the Hon'ble Tribunal's directives the 2023 competent authority has issued speaking order vide No.P/CC/5003/O.A No. 148/2022/PCB/Engg. dated. 01.06.2022 under Annexure-A/10 to O.A.

Kalpeswar Behera

3.18 It is humbly submitted that, the Respondent No.3 in speaking order dated 01.06.2022 under Annexure-A/10 to O.A has not considered the claim of the Applicant after scrutinized the records vis-à-vis the extant provisions related to the case with view that, the parity of an interpolated candidate can only be provided regarding service benefit (seniority, fixation of pay etc.) with his immediate juniors and not with his seniors, who are obviously appointed at an early date. In this case, there is no junior to the Applicant pertaining to the panel of the track maintainers of the said notification allotted to KUR. The Applicant features at the bottom of the panel of all the Track maintainers. Since there is no junior available pertaining to the same panel and category, no parity of seniority and other service benefits can be considered in favour of the Applicant.

4. The applicant has filed rejoinder reiterating the stand taken by him in the OA.

5. Heard both sides and perused the records.

6. In the rejoinder filed by the applicant, the applicant has enclosed an order dated 16.06.2021 issued by the respondents ante dating seniority and consequential service benefits in

Kalpeswar Behera

respect of Sri Sohan Lal Mall, Track maintainer IV. Ld. Counsel for the applicant submitted that Sri Sohan Lal Mall was also similarly situated and had approached this Tribunal and the respondents were directed to dispose of his representation. The relevant portion is extracted below: The Applicant, Sri SohanLal Mall, working as Track maintainer-IV under before the SSE/P Way/TLHR, has made the OA, under reference above, Hon'ble Tribunal for ante-dating his date of appointment from 17.10.2019 at par with other recruits of the Employment Notification No.ECOR/RRC/D/2006/01 dated 28.10.2006 and to be granted with all consequential service benefits. The Hon'ble Tribubal, in their directive, dated 30.04.2021, have directed the Respondent No.4 to dispose of the representation of the Applicant dated 28.12.2020 by way of a 'Reasoned Speaking Order to be communicated to the Applicant within a period of 02 months from the date of receipt of the copy of the order. Accordingly, the undersigned, being the Respondent No.4 and the Senior Divisional Personnel Officer of the Division, has gone through the said representation made by the Applicant dated 28.12.2020, corroborating with other relevant documents and the extant provisions relevant to the case and dispose as under:

i) That the candidature of the Applicant was admitted following the verdict of the Hon'ble CAT/CTC in the OA No.220/2014 dated 14.05.2019. He was called for the formal document verification and for the requisite medical examination. After completion of due processes, the Applicant was allotted to the KUR Division for posting as Trackmaintainer-IV vide RRC/BBS's letter dated 05.09.2019.

ii) Consequently, the Division office, vide Its order No.P/Engg/130/2019 dated 16.10.2019, has posted the Applicant as Trackmaintainer-IV under SSE/P.Way/TLHR. And the candidate joined the working post on 17.10.2019 as is evident from his representation.

li) In this regard, the relevant papers, viz; the extract of the panel papers of the said Notification that were sent to KUR, were sought from HQ office. The RRC/BBS was also requested to provide the Interpolated merit position of the Applicant vis-a-vis other empanelled candidates in the said notification. In

Kalpeswar Behera reply, the RRC/BBS has Interpolated the Applicant's seniority with Rank-2141 (copy enclosed). iv)Further, from among the empanelled candidates t KUR. the Applicant is to be placed above Sri Pramod Kumar Parida STRAT were allotted to (Rank-2172) and below Sri Samarjit Kumar (Rank-2140). On enquiry, it is revealed that Sri Pramod Kumar Parida is working as Trackmaintainer-IV at KAPG under SSE/P.Way/KAPG w.o.f 02.11.2012.

v) Therefore the Applicant shall count his effective seniority w.e.f 02.11.2012 with proforma pay fixation w.e.f 17.10.2019. i.e. from the date of his actual joining in the working post. The AEN/DNKL is being advised suitably to ensure the fixation of pay of the Applicant, the copy of which is enclosed. This disposes of the representation dated 28.12.2020 by the Applicant. The receipt of this communication may be acknowledged.

7. Since the applicant is also similarly placed the respondents are directed to consider the case of the applicant accordingly and pass a speaking order to that effect and communicate the same within a period of 60 days from date of receipt of copy of this order.

8. The OA stands disposed of. Pending MA’s stands disposed of. No costs.

(PRAMOD KUMAR DAS) (SUDHI RANJAN MISHRA) MEMBER (A) MEMBER (J)

Kalpeswar Behera