Holding

The Railway Recruitment Board must appoint all remaining selected candidates within twelve weeks, and any further delay will be treated as contempt of court.

Summary

In 1987 the Railway Recruitment Board, Madras advertised about 500 non‑technical posts and conducted written exams. After the results, a second written exam was ordered, which was later quashed by the Madras High Court. The Supreme Court directed the Board to appoint the 775 candidates selected in 1987 within two weeks, a deadline that was missed. Multiple extensions were sought, but the Board’s explanations – abolition of posts, reduction of vacancies, and candidates' unwillingness – were found unsatisfactory. The Court held that the Board could not evade its duty and ordered that all remaining candidates be appointed within twelve weeks, warning that non‑compliance would constitute contempt. The contempt petitions were disposed of and the appeals dismissed.

Issues considered

Whether the Railway Recruitment Board is bound to appoint the candidates selected in 1987 despite subsequent changes in vacancies.
Whether the Board's explanations for delay constitute a valid ground for extending the time for appointment.
Whether the failure to comply with the Supreme Court's earlier order amounts to contempt of court.

Legislation cited

Contempt of Courts Act

Subjects

service lawcontempt of courtrailway recruitmentappointment compliancenon‑technical postsjudicial ordersdelay in appointments

Judgment

A V.CHARULATHA AND OTHERS
v.
S. GUNALAN, CHAIRMAN, RAILWAY RECRUITMENT BOARD,
MADRAS AND ORS.

APRIL 4, 1995
B
[R.M. SAHAI AND S.B. MAJMUDAR, JJ.]

Service Law-Contempt Petition-Railways-Selection for posts in non-
technical categories-Results published-l>ecision to hold second examina-
C tion-Quashe~Appea}-[)irection of Supreme Court to appoint selected
candidates within a period of two weeks-Non- Compliance-Lapse of eight
years-Explanation for not implementing order not satisfactory-Commitment
to appoint candidates by March 1995 not honoured-l>irection made to ap-
point all remaining candidates within a period of twelve weeks.
D
Contempt of Coutts Ac4 1971-&ervice matter---RaUways-Selection of
posts in non-technical categorie~esults published-Decision to hold
second examination-Quashed-l>irection of Supreme Court to appoint
selected candidater-Non compliance-Commitment to appoint candidates
by March 1995 not honoured-l>irection made to appoint all remaining
E candidates within a period of twelve weeks.

In 1987 the Railway Recruitment Board, Madras, advertised nearly
500 posts In the non-technlcal categories In the Indian Railways. Written
examlnaUons were held on 15·11· 1987. On the next day a news Item was
F published In one of the newspapers expressing concern about the possible
leakage of the quesUon papers. However, results were published and
Interviews were held. Since some of the candidates who had secured very
high marks In the written examlnaUon secured very poor marks In the
Interview, the authorlUes dedded to hold a second written examlnaUon.
Some of the calldidates, who had appeared In the examination challenged
G the order before the Central AdmlnlstraUve Tribunal. Some candidates
approached the High Court. The Tribunal held that the Railway Recruit·
ment Board was enUUed to conduct the second examination. ObjecUon
Ried before the High Court that after constituUon of Tribunal, the High
Court had no jurisdiction, was negatived. Against this order the Railways
H Ried SLP. No Interim order was granted by this Court. The High Court
140
V.CHARULATHAv. RLY.BOARD 141

quashed the order passed for holding second examination. This judg- A
men! affirmed by the Division Bench was challenged before the Supreme
Court.

On 18.9.1992 this court directed the appellants to appoint the
selected candidates according to their merits in the existing vacancies
within a period of two weeks from the date the order was passed. But B
nothing substantial was done. Contempt applications were filed on

--
. --'.
30.4.1993, i.e. after a lapse of nearly two years since the order was passed
that it was brought to the notice of the Court that the appellant had
nothing to do with appointments and it was the responsibility of the
appointing authority. On 27.9.1993 this Court directed issue of notice to C
the appointing authority. An assurance was given that all the candidates
selected will be appointed according to the merit list in a phased manner
by March'95. On 1.9.1994 this Court directed the Railways to explain as
to why the order passed by this court had not boen complied with. It was
prayed that extension of one year may be granted to comply with the order.
Reason stated for non-compliance of the order were that number of posts D
bad been absolished due to introduction of computers aud closing down
of various works units; that by the time the writ petitions were decided
by the High Court and the order that no fresh examinations could be
held became final, the Railway Recruitment Board had received two panels
of 1989 and 1990 consisting of 998 candidates; that the availability of the
vacancies totally changed and it became impossible to appoint the selected E
candidates and that there was no way out except to appoint these persons
as and when vacancies arise. It was stated that the candidates who were
selected for Southern Railway had been offered appointment in other
Railways, they had expressed unwillingness to join the post.
F
Disposing of the matter, this Court

HELD: 1.1. In the instant case eight years had elapsed since
- advertisement was issued by the Railway Recruitment Board for the
selection in the non-technical categories in the Indian Railways. The result
was decldred in 1988. The explanation for not implementing the order G
passed by this conrt was not satisfactory. The authorities had not
honoured their own commitments to appoint the candidates by March,
1995. 775 candidates were selected in 1987. Decision to hold fresh examina·
!ion was taken in 1989. Immediately the candidates approached the
Tribunal and the High Court. The Railways were, therefore, aware that H
142 SUPREME COURT REPORTS 1199.5]3 S.C.R.

A disputes in respect of these vacancies were pending adjudication before
courts. They could not, therefore, hold a fresh selection subsequently for
these posts either in 1989 or in 1990. [148-C·D]

Two panels received in 1989 and 1990 could have been only in
respect of vacancies which could have accrued after 1987. It was nowhere
B stated either in the advertisement issued in 1989 or 1990 nor it was stated
before the High Court that vacancies for which selection was held in 1987

--
were again put up for advertisement in 1989 or 1990. It was thus not
understandable how these vacancies which existed in 1987 vanished in ).. .
1989, 1990 and 1992. The order for holding second examination was
C quashed as far back as 1991. In absence of any stay order obtained from
any court, the Railways were not entitled to take a decision not to appoint
these persons or to act in such a manner as to deprive the candidates
selected in 1987 of the opportunity of being appointed. Even the claim of
abolition of posts or a reduction in number appeared to have been made
with little responsibility. It was not stated before the High Court when
D petition was decided in 1991. Nor it was stated in Special Leave Petition.
The abolition of posts according to affidavit of the Chief Personnel Officer
took place between 1987 and 1993-94. Yet till the petitions were decided,
no such difficulty was raised. Explanation of the appellants that the
candidates who were selected for Southern Railway having been offered
E appointment in other Railways and they having expressed unwillingness to
join the post, they had no claim to be appointed was unsatisfactory. The
entire exercise of the appellants was wholly contrary to fairplay.
[148-E to G, 149-A]
1.2. Railways shall appoint all the remaining candidates within a
F period of twelve weeks. [149-C]
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : I.A. Nos. 160-238 of 1993
Etc.

IN -
G
Civil Appeal Nos. 2577-2616 & 32-70 of 1991 Etc.

From the Judgment and Order dated 15.4.1991 of the Madras High
Court in W.A.No. 533 of 1991.

H V.R.Reddy, Additional Solicitor General, Arvind Kr. Sharma, B.
V.CHARULATHAv. RLY.BOARD 143

Krishna Prasad, Hemant Sharma, V. Balachandran, V. Ramasubramaniam, A
K. Rajendra Choudhury, Rakesh Sharma and Ambrish Kumar for the
appearing parties.

The following Order of the Court was delivered:

R.M. SAHA!, J. These applications have arisen in extremely unfor-
B
tunate circumstance. The anxiety of this Court to avoid taking any drastic
action appears to have not been properly appreciated and even though two
years have elapsed since the learned Additional Solicitor General assured
t~e Court that the orders passed by the High Court and this Court shall
be complied with latest by March, 1995 and persuaded the Court to frame C
a time schedule, but we are sorry to say that except gaining time and
putting excuses nothing has been done leaving no option to this Court
except to pass this order.

A little background is necessary to appreciate the unpleasant obser- D
vation made by us. In 1987 the Railway Recruitment Board, Madras,
advertised nearly 500 posts in the non-technical categories like Commer-
--~ . cial Clerks, Ticket Collectors, Train Clerks, Etc. in the Indian Railways.
Written examinations were held on 15th November, 1987 in 3997 ci;ntres
as large number of candidates had applied pursuant to the employment
notice. On the next day a news item was published in one of the newspapers E
expressing concern about the possible leakage of the question papers, but
nothing happened and the results were published on 7th September, 1988.
Interviews were held on 10th October, 1988. Since some of the candidates
who had secured very high marks in the written examination secured very
poor marks in the interview, the authorities decided to hold a second F
written examination. Letters were issued in April, 1989. On the very next
day, some of the aggrieved candidates, who had appeared in the examina-
tion and had been called for interview approached the Central Administra-
tive Tribunal and some others approached the High Court. On 13th June,
-, 1989 the Central Administrative Tribunal held that the Railway Recruit- G
ment Board was entitled to conduct the second written examination in
respect of those candidates who had been declared eligible for interview.
It further held that the marks obtained in the first written examination as
well as in the second written examination should be totalled and the
average be obtained and it should be considered to be the final marks for
purposes of selection. Other batch of petitions was heard by the High H
144 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1995) 3 S.C.R.

A Court. The appellants claimed that after constitution of Tribunal, the High
Court had no jurisdiction. It was negatived. The appeals filed before the
Division Bench were also dismissed. Against this order the Railways ap-
/
proached this Court and obtained leave (CA.Nos. 32-70/91). Since no
interim order was granted by this Court, the learned Single Judge of the
B Madras High Court heard writ petitions and quashed the order passed by
the authorities on 15th April, 1989 for holding second examination. He
further directed that the list of successful candidates may be published on
or before 31st March, 1991. This judgment was affirmed by the Division
Bench on 15th April, 1991. Against this judgment the Railways approached

C
this Court and leave was granted on 3rd June, 1991 and it was directed
that these appeals may be connected with the earlier Civil Appeals which
were directed against the order passed by the High Court repelling the
claim of the appellants that the High Court had no jurisdiction to decide
;..

--
the petitions. Both the sets of appeals were listed on various dates in 1991
but they could not be decided.

D Therefore, on 18th September, 1992 this Court directed. the appel-
lants to appoint the selected candidates according to their merits in the
existing vacancies within a period of two weeks from the date the order
was passed. But nothing substantial was done with the result that contempt
applications were filed. These applications and the appeals came to be
E disposed of on 30th April, 1993. The order is extracted below:

''The learned Additional Solicitor General appearing on behalf of
the appellant (Chairman, Railway Recruitment Board, Madras)
and for the respondents (alleged contemnor in the contempt
F petitions) states that the appellant has selected the candidates and
sent a list containing 775 selected candidates as per the original
requisition pursuant to the order of this Court to three authorities,
namely, (1) Chief Personnel Officer, Southern Railway, Madras
(2) Financial Advisor and Chief Accounts Officer, Southern Rail-
G way, Madras, (3) Chief Personnel Officer, Integral Coach, Param-
bur, Madras. He further states that as on present date the appellant
has nothing to do with the appointment of the selected candidates
and it is for the appointing authorities to appoint and fill up the
vacancies as notified from the list of the selected candidates
H according to their merit.
. V. CHAR ULATHA v. RL Y. BOARD 145

Since this matter is pending for quite a long time since the A
institution of the proceedings before the High Court, we hope and
trust that the appointing authorities to whom a separate selected
list of candidates is stated t0 have been sent, would take ap-
propriate and expeditious steps in appointing the candidates, if
necessary, by relaxing their age limit by taking into consideration
their age on the date of submission of the applications. The interim
B
order passed on 18.9.92 is modified to this extent.

As the learned Solicitor General has stated that the appellant
has nothing to do with the appointments and the selected list has
already been forwarded, under these circumstances, the appeals C
have practically become infructuous and hence the appeals are
dismissed. I.As. in the appeals consequently stand dismissed.

The Office is directed to send a copy of the order to above
mentioned appointing authorities.
D
As we have now dismissed the appeals, no action is called for
in the contempt petitions. Accordingly, these contempt petitions
are disposed of."

Thus it was after a lapse of nearly two years since the order was passed
that it was brought to the notice of this Court that the appellant had E
nothing to do with appointments and it was the responsibility of the
appointing authority. Therefore, on 27th September, 1993 this Court
directed notice to be issued to the Chief Personnel Officer, Southern
Railway, Madras, Financial Advisor and Chief Accounts Officer, Southern
Railway, Madras, and the Chief Personnel Officer, Integral Coach, Param- F
bur, Madras. It was only after the notices were issued to these officers that
a counter-affidavit was filed by the Deputy Chief Personnel Officer,
Southern Railway, Madras. After hearing parties, this Court passed an

- order on 8th December, 1993 which is extracted below:-

"Learned Additional Solicitor Gen. appearing on behalf of respon- G
dents, i.e., appointing authorities assure before us that all the
candidates selected in pursuance of notice No. 1/87 dated 15th of
April, 1987 amounting to a number of 775 vacancies will be
appointed according to the merit list already prepared and that
some of these candidates wiU be absorbed under first phase by H
146 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1995] 3 S.C.R. .
A 10th march, 1994. Out of them 100 are going to the posts of artisans
and the remaining shall be absorbed in the posts namely, Com-
mercial Clerks, Ticket Collectors, Train Clerks in the Indian Rail- .J
ways on or before the end of March, 1995. Regarding these other
artisans posts amounting to 100 will be filled up by the selected
candidates only if the candidates are willing to accept that post
B
otherwise they will be appointed only in the posts for which the
selection was made. The respondents have given also an undertak-
ing that till all the selected candidates are appointed no selection
will be made in the normal course and no other new appointments
will be made except the appointments on the compassionate
C grounds.

These selections as assured. should be made without fail. All
the candidates should be given the age relaxation till their ap-
pointments are complete. List this matter on 11th of March, 1994".

D
When these applications came up for hearing, it was stated on behalf of
the appellants that 197 letters of appointment had been issued. On 1st
September, 1994 this Court directed the Railways to explain as to why the
Order pas;ed by this Court has not been complied with. The additional
affidavit was filed on 15th September, 1994. It was stated that 105 un-
E reserved, 70 Scheduled Castes and 4 Scheduled Tribes were offered ap-
pointment in Non-Technical Popular Category in Southern Railway and
Integral Coach Factory. 70 unreserved, 26 Scheduled Castes and 4
'5cheduled Tribes were offered to express willingness for the post Skilled-
Artisan in Southern Railway on 8th March, 1994. Out of this, 46 gave their
F coment. It is further stated that since there were large number of can-
didates it became nece ... ~ary tu locate vacancies in the Indian Railways and
a reference was made to Railway Board accordingly. It agreed to employ

-
them in Central railway. Therefore, 40 unreserved, 12 scheduled castes
and 2 scheduled tribes candidates who did not express their willingness for
acceptance of Skilled Artisan post as stated earlier were offered to express
G their willingness to join the Central Railway as Ticket Collector. Over and
above these _,4 candidates, 53 unreserved, 40 scheduled castes and 18
scheduled tribes candidates were also offered to express their willingness
to join the Central Railway. Out of these 17 scheduled castes and 4
scheduled tribes and 41 unreserved candidates expressed their willingness.
H The affidavit stated that after ascertaining the number of candidates who
-, __
V. CHARULATHA "· RL Y. BOARD 147

actually joined the Central Railway the shortfall was proposed to be made A
good by appointing the willing candidates in order of merit. The affidavit
stated that even after all this and excluding those candidates who expressed
their unwillingness to join Central Railway approximately 319 candidates
remained who were proposed to be offered appointment before March •
1995. It was, therefore, prayed that extension of one year may be granted B
to comply with the order.

From a chart. filed by the learned Additional Solicitor General on
___ , the last day of hearing, 27th March 1995, it appears 147 candidates have
. -\ been appointed in non-technical categories in Southern Railways and
Integral Coach Factory, Madras, and 38 have been appointed as Skilled- C
Artisans in Southern Railways. Reason for non-compliance of the order,
as stated in the affidavit of the Chief Personnel Officer filed in November
1993, is two fold; one, that number of posts had been abolished due to
introduction of computer and closing down of various works units. Second
reason explained in the affidavit and which has been vehemently pressed D
by the learned Additional Solicitor General is that by the time the writ
petitions were decided by the High Court and the order that no fresh
examinations could be held became final, it became 1992 and by that time
the appellants/Railway Recruitment Board had received two panels of 1989
and 1990 consisting of 998 candidates on 8th August, 1990 and 28th March,
1991 respectively. According to the learned Additional Solicitor General, E
the availability of the vacancies thus totally changed and by the time the
disputed panels were received by the Southern Railway on 23rd September,
1992 the number of vacancies got so reduced that it became impossible to
appoint the selected candidates. The affidavit further states that for this
change in situation the Railways cannot be blamed. Consequently, the F
learned Additional Solicitor General urged that there was no way out
-· except to appoint these persons as and when vacancies arise. He also stated
that so long as all the candidates are not absorbed, no further selection
shall be held. He produced a Chart showing that out of 775 candidates,
106 expressed unwillingness to accept the offer of appointment made and
66 should be deemed to be unwilling to accept the offer of appointment G
in NTPC category in Southern Railway or the post of Skilled-Artisan in
Southern Railway followed by the post of NTPC category in Central
Railway in spite of repeated offers. The Chart further indicates that offer
is being made to 111 willing candidates for the post of NTPC category in
Central Railway and in 1995-96 it is estimated to offer appointment for the H
148 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1995] 3 S.C.R.

A left over numbering 304 in NTPC category in Western Railway, numbering
about 70 in Southern Railway, numbering about 50 in South Eastern
Railway and the balance in different Railways suitably.

From what has been narrated above, it is more than apparent that
B the problem is the creation of the Railways themselves. Consequently
difficulties have arisen. But they cannot be permitted to remain unsolved
for such a long time that the purpose of selection and its benefit stand·
frustrated. Eight years have elapsed since advertisement was issued. Even
the result was declared in 1988. The explanation in the affidavit for not
implementing the order passed by this Court is not satisfactory. The
C authorities have not honoured their own commitments to appoint the
candidates by March, 1995. It is not disputed that 775 candidates were
selected in 1987. Decision to hold fresh examination was taken in 1989.
Immediately the candidates approached the Tribunal and the High Court.
'Fhe Railways were, therefore, aware that disputes in respect of these
D vacancies were pending adjudication before courts. They could not, there-
fore, hold a fresh selection subsequently for these posts either in 1989 or
in 1990. The statement in the affidavit of the Chief Personnel Officer that
two panels were received in 1989 and 1990 is indeed surprising. These
panels could have been only in respect of vacancies which could have
accrued after 1987. It was nowhere stated either in the advertisement
E issued in 1989 or 1990 nor it was stated before the High Court that
vacancies for which selection was held in 1987 were again put up for
advertisement in 1989 or 1990. It is thus not understandable how these
vacancies which existed in 1987 were again put up for advertisement in 1989
or 1990. It is thus not understandable how these vacancies which existed
F in 1987 vanished in 1989, 1990 and 1992. The learned Single Judge had
quashed the order for holding second examination as far back as 1991. In
absence of any stay order obtained from any court, the Railways were not
entitled to take upon themselves a decision not to appoint these persons
or to act in such a manner as to deprive the candidates selected i11 1987
from being appointed. Even the claim of abolition of posts or a reduction
G in number appears to have been made with little responsibility. It was not
stated before the High Court when petition was decided in 1991. Nor it
was stated in Special Leave Petition. The abolition of posts according to
affidavit of the Chief Personnel Officer took place between 1987 to 1993-
~4. Yet till the petitions were decided, no such difficulty was raised. In any
H case, even if this be so then how selections were held in 1989-90. We are
V.CHARULATHAv. RLY.BOARD 149

further not satisfied by the explanation of the appellants that the candidates A
who were selected for Southern railway having been offered appointment
in other Railways and they having expressed unwillingness to join the post,
they have no claim to be appointed. The entire exercise of the appellants
was wholly contrary to fairplay. It may not be out of place to mention that
it was brought to our notice that some of the selected candidates due to B
delay and the attitude of the Railways were so frustrated that they com-
mitted suicide.

We accordingly direct the appellant-the Railways to appoint all the
remaining candidates within a period of twelve weeks from today. The
letters of appoiotment shall be issued for appoiotment in Southern Zone. C
Letters shall be issued even to those candidates who did not agree to go
outside as we are informed that they are now willing to join even other
zones. But so far as female candidates are concerned they shall be offered
appointment only in Southern Zone. Those who have joined outside the
zone shall have no claim for Southern Zone by virtue of this order. In case
there are no vacancies, the Railways may take appropriate steps to get the D
vacancies created within the same time. It is made clear that no further
time shall be granted and in case the appointments are not made of all the
candidates within twelve weeks, it shall be taken as violation of the order
passed by this Court and the persons responsible shall be proceeded
against. We are not very happy to pass this order. But the Railways have E
not left any option in view of the order passed in September, 1992 and then
the order passed in December, 1993 on the assurances given by the learned
Additional Solicitor General that all the selected candidates shall be
accommodated in a phased manner by March, 1995. These appointments
shall not be subject to question in any further proceedings.
F
The I.As. are disposed of accordingly.

R.A. Matters disposed of.