Amar Deep Yadav Son Of-Bansh Bahadur vs Union Of India Through General Manager, North Eastern Railways, Gorakhpur & Ors.

Anjani Nandan Sharan, Member (A)

Heard Shri Damodar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Atul Kumar Shahi, learned counsel for the respondents.

The instant Original Application has been filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985 seeking following reliefs :-

“…. 8 (i ) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents to allow the applicant Amar Deep Yadav to appear in Medical Test with other candidates under the category superannuation scheme.

ii) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents to permit the applicant to join on the post of Driver (running staff) with other candidates.

iii) to issue any order or direction, which this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

iv) to award the cost of the application to the applicant.

The brief facts of the case as per the applicant are that the applicant is son of Shri Bansh Bahadur, Locopilot (Mail) in Diesel Lobby Charbagh, North Eastern Railway, Lucknow. The father of the applicant submitted form for appointment of the applicant under Liberalised Active Retirement Scheme for Guaranteed Employment for Safety Staff (LARSGESS). Subsequently, under this Scheme, written examination was conducted and the applicant appeared in the said test. The Principal Kisan Inter College Pipra Ismil Gonda has issued a verification letter on 29.01.2016 but the applicant has not been issued a letter for medical test. Other candidates who appeared in the written test was called for medical examination. The applicant is entitled to get appointment with the other candidates who appear in said examination along with the applicant..

In the counter affidavit filed by the respondents, it has been submitted that the application submitted by father of the applicant for his appointment was considered under LARSGESS for the post of Assistant Loco Pilot. The applicant was called for written examination on 01.11.2014 but could not qualify the written examination, the applicant was given second chance for written examination on 11.07.2015 and he qualified as per the result. The applicant was called for the aptitude test held on 18.08.2015 and 19.08.2015 but he could not qualify the aptitude test for Assistant Loco Pilot. The applicant was again called for the aptitude test (second chance) held on 31.12.2015 and 01.01.2016 but again he could not qualify the aptitude test. Since he could not qualify the aptitude test his case was not considered for screening and due to this no medical memo was issued.

In the rejoinder affidavit, the applicant has submitted that in the second aptitude test held on 31.12.2015 and 01.01.2016, he appeared with two other candidates but unfortunately, the result of the applicant has not been declared. He has requested the Court to summon the result of the test and allow the applicant to check up his copy with the copy of other candidates.

In the supplementary counter affidavit, the respondents have reiterated the facts that the applicant could not qualify the aptitude test for Assistant Loco Pilot, the respondents have reiterated and reaffirmed the submissions made in the counter affidavit. They have further filed a Misc. Application No. 519 of 2022 on 08.02.2022, wherein it has been submitted that the relief claimed by the applicant is arising out of LARSGESS which has ceased to exist and as such, no direction in respect of appointment under LARSGESS is permissible under Law. In support of their submission, they placed reliance upon the judgment passed by the Apex Court in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 1407 of 2019 in case of Abhishek Kumar Jha & Others vs. Union of India and others, wherein it has been held that once the scheme was withdrawn, no benefits whatsoever including one of consideration of representation could be offered to any of the persons.They also placed reliance upon the judgment passed by the Apex Court in another matter bearing W.P.(Civil) No. 78 of 2021 in case of Manjeet Singh and others. Vs. Union of India and others, where the Apex Court held that all claim based on LARSGESS must now be closed.

In the supplementary rejoinder, the applicant has again requested the Court to summon the record of the applicant and allow him to peruse his copy of Written Test and Aptitude Test held on 18.08.2015, 19.08.2015, 31.12.2015 and 01.01.2016.

Submissions of learned counsel for both the parties have been heard and records have been gone through.

The facts of the case are that the applicant is the son of a Loco Pilot (Mail) in Diesel Lobby Charbagh, North Eastern Railway, Lucknow who applied for employment of his son on the post of Assistant Loco Pilot under LARSGESS. The authorities did consider the case of the applicant and the applicant was allowed to appear in written examination and aptitude test. The applicant cleared the written examination in second chance but he could not clear the aptitude test even in second chance. Therefore, no medical memo in respect of the applicant was issued.

We would like to point out that in a large number of similar OAs, this Bench and various Benches of this Tribunal have held that since the LARSGESS scheme is no longer in operation and it has been held to be ultra virus of the Constitution and patently illegal by the different Courts, no relief under this Scheme would be granted to anyone.

The Apex Court in Writ Petition (C) 1407 of 2019 in case of Abhishek Kumar Jha & Others vs. Union of India and ors. has held that once the scheme itself was withdrawn, no benefit whatsoever including one of consideration of representation could be afforded to any of the persons.

In another similar matter, the Apex Court in WP (Civil) No. 78 of 2021 in case of Manjit and ors. Vs. Union of India and ors. has held that all claims based on LARSGESS must now be closed. The relevant para in this regard is reproduced below:-

The reliefs which have been sought in the present case, as already noted earlier, are for a writ of mandamus to the Union of India to appoint the petitioners in their respective cadres. A conscious decision has been taken by the Union of India to terminate the Scheme. This has been noticed in the order of this Court dated 6 March 2019, which has been extracted above. While taking this decision on 5 March 2019, the Union of India had stated that where wards had completed all formalities prior to 27 October 2017 (the date of termination of the Scheme) and were found fit, since the matter was pending consideration before this Court, further instructions would be issued in accordance with the directions of this Court. Noticing the above decision, this Court, in its order dated 6 March 2019, specifically observed that since the Scheme stands terminated and is no longer In existence, nothing further need be done in the matter. The Scheme provided for an avenue of a back door entry into the service of the railways. This would be fundamentally at odds with Article 16 of the Constitution. The Union government has with justification discontinued the scheme. The petitioners can claim neither a vested right nor a legitimate expectation under such a Scheme. All claims based on the Scheme must now be closed.

In view of the above and the law laid down by the Apex Court, the instant Original Application is liable to be dismissed being devoid of merit. Accordingly, this Original Application is dismissed.

Pending MAs, if any, stand disposed of, accordingly. No order as to costs.