Case Note & Summary
The dispute arose from the termination of a railway trainee from the post of Apprentice/Trainee Senior Section Engineer (SSE) after he failed the General and Subsidiary Rules (G&SR) training examination twice. The Railway Recruitment Board, Muzaffarpur issued Centralized Employment Notice No.02/2014 for recruitment to Group 'C' non-gazetted posts including SSE. The respondent was selected and offered provisional appointment on 14.09.2016, with a condition that unsatisfactory performance during probation would lead to termination. Under the Master Circular No.29 dated 28.06.1991 and the Indian Railway Establishment Manual, 1989, the prescribed training period for SSE was 52 weeks. The respondent completed 46 weeks of training and was sent to Zonal Rail Training Institute, Muzaffarpur for a three-week G&SR training from 07.11.2017 to 27.11.2017. He failed the examination held after that training, as published on 26.12.2017. He was given a second attempt without stipend from 06.03.2018 to 26.03.2018, but again failed the examination as per result published on 26.04.2018. Consequently, his services were terminated on 04.01.2019, and he was directed to refund a stipend of Rs.1,53,354 which had been paid inadvertently during the second training. Aggrieved, the respondent approached the Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench, which dismissed his original application on 30.07.2019, upholding termination and observing that the department may sympathetically consider waiver of the stipend repayment. The Tribunal rejected allegations of discrimination among trainees and found no punitive intent. The respondent's review and miscellaneous applications were also dismissed on 25.10.2019 and 30.01.2020 respectively. He then filed a writ petition before the High Court of Judicature at Patna, which framed the core issue as whether the petitioner was required to pass any prescribed departmental examination for the post of SSE. The High Court, by judgment dated 06.02.2023, held that the appellants had not prescribed any departmental examination for conferring permanent status against the post of SSE. Accordingly, the High Court allowed the writ petition, set aside the termination order dated 04.01.2019 and the recovery order dated 26.02.2019, and directed the appellants to extend all service and monetary benefits due to the respondent within four months. The appellants, Union of India, challenged this judgment before the Supreme Court, arguing that the Master Circular, Employment Notice, and provisional appointment letter clearly mandated training and written test as prerequisites, and that the respondent's failure justified termination. The provided excerpt ends before the Supreme Court's final ruling, and thus the final outcome of the appeal is not stated in the available text.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Training Prerequisite - Master Circular No.29 dated 28.06.1991, Clauses 2, 3, 3.1 - Initial training period and written qualifying examination are mandatory for absorption of directly recruited Group 'C' non-gazetted staff; retention in service depends on successful completion of training and passing requisite test - Respondent, appointed as Apprentice/Trainee SSE, completed only 46 of 52 weeks training and failed G&SR examination twice; termination order and stipend recovery were challenged before CAT Patna and High Court - Held by High Court that no departmental examination was prescribed for conferring permanent status on SSE, thereby setting aside termination and recovery orders (Paras 3-13.1). B) Service Law - Probation and Termination - Provisional Appointment Letter Condition - Provisional appointment letter explicitly stated that performance in field of training during probation period, if unsatisfactory, would render services liable to termination - Respondent's termination after failing G&SR training twice was upheld by CAT Patna which found no discrimination and no punitive intent - High Court later set aside termination on ground that no departmental examination was prescribed, but the Supreme Court appeal was pending (Paras 5-13.1). C) Administrative Law - Discrimination Among Trainees - Master Circular No.29 and Indian Railway Establishment Manual, 1989 - Respondent alleged that four other trainees were granted permanent posting after 46 weeks training without G&SR training at ZRTI - CAT Patna rejected discrimination claim observing that two other trainees allotted to Construction Organization were also sent for G&SR training and all except one passed first attempt, indicating test was not artificially taxing - High Court did not address discrimination separately but set aside termination on other grounds (Paras 8-8.3, 11-12). D) Service Law - Recovery of Stipend - Master Circular and railway instructions - Respondent allowed second training without stipend but stipend of Rs.1,53,354 was disbursed due to administrative inadvertence and recovery order issued - CAT Patna directed department to sympathetically consider waiver of repayment; High Court set aside recovery order along with termination (Paras 7-8, 12).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the respondent was required to pass any prescribed departmental examination for the post of Senior Section Engineer before permanent absorption; whether termination for failing G&SR training examination twice was valid; whether recovery of stipend paid during second training attempt was permissible; whether there was discrimination among similarly placed trainees.
Law Points
- Training and written test are mandatory prerequisites for absorption of directly recruited Group 'C' non-gazetted staff
- retention in service depends on successful completion of training and passing requisite test
- provisional appointment letter condition on probation and termination
- recovery of stipend for second training attempt without stipend
- discrimination among trainees
- departmental examination requirement.
