Union of India and 4 others v. Indra Jeet and another

Judgment

1. Heard Shri Shiv Kumar Pal, learned counsel for the petitioners, Shri Sunil Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the respondents and perused the material available on record.

2. This writ petition has been filed by Union of India and officers of the Railways challenging the order dated 04.07.2025 whereby the Central Administrative Tribunal, Allahabad has allowed the Original Application (OA) No.1277 of 2024 (Indra Jeet and another vs. Union of India and others) filed by the respondents and set aside the orders dated

29.08.2024 and 11.09.2024, impugned before it. The Tribunal has also issued a direction to the petitioners to round off the total marks obtained by the respondents in written examination in decimal of 0.5 and more to the next higher integer in accordance with para 204.5 of INDIAN 2 WRIA No. - 15257 of 2025 RAILWAY ESTABLISHMENT MANUAL (IREM) VOLUME I and permit the respondents to appear for the next stage of examination.

3. Brief facts of the case are that the respondents no.1 and 2 are working as Senior Section Engineers (Design) in the Mechanical Department of Varanasi Locomotive Works, Varanasi. A notification dated 06.01.2024 was issued for formation of panel of promotion to Group-B post of Assistant Works Manager (AWM) (Level-08) in Mechanical Department against 70% quota. As per the notification, candidates had to clear written examination, viva voce and marks were to be allotted based upon their performance in written examination, viva voce and record of service. The respondents appeared in written examination, result whereof was declared on 03.06.2024 in which the respondent No.1 was placed at serial number 13 with 59.93 marks and respondent No.2 at serial no.16 with 59.79 marks.

4. The petitioners did not permit the respondents to appear in viva voce and when they represented to the Department, orders dated

29.08.2024 and 11.09.2024, respectively in relation to the respondent Nos.1 and 2 were passed by the concerned authority informing them that rounding off marks, as per para 204.5 of IREM Volume I, was permissible only while preparing the final result. These two orders were

challenged by the respondents before the Tribunal contending that since the qualifying marks were 60, had marks obtained by the respondents been rounded off to 60, they would have qualified for viva voce.

5. The Tribunal, after considering the case of the parties, found that the respondents were entitled to get benefit of the provision of rounding off as contemplated under para 204.5 of IREM Volume I and granted relief to them, as noted above.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that though para 204.5 of IREM Volume I provides for rounding off marks to next higher integer figure when the total marks in decimal are 0.5 and more, since, as per the clarification made by the Department on 26.12.2022, such rounding off is permissible only while preparing the final result of 3 WRIA No. - 15257 of 2025 selection, as communicated to the respondents vide orders impugned before the Tribunal, the respondents, merely based upon their performance in written examination, could not raise a plea of rounding off, inasmuch as, the next two stages of selection, i.e. viva voce and award of marks based upon record of service, were still left and, hence, even if the provision for rounding off was to be applied, such occasion/stage had not arisen in the case of the respondents and, therefore, the orders impugned before the Tribunal were valid and the Tribunal has erred in allowing the OA granting relief to the respondents.

7. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submits that language used in para 204.5 of IREM Volume I is plain and simple and it is only after the written examination is over and marks are awarded, rounding off is to be done and not as suggested on behalf of the petitioners. It is further contended that before the Tribunal, specific stand was taken on behalf of the respondents that through the representations made by them before the Department they had cited examples of rounding off total marks in case of selection made by East Coast Railway, Bhubaneswar on 09.05.2024 in which, one Sujeet Kumar Awadhiya, shown at Serial No.12 was awarded 59.52 marks which were rounded off to 60 and he qualified for viva voce. Submission is that the said averment was inappropriately responded to by the petitioners in the counter affidavit filed before the Tribunal and once the evidence qua Sujeet Kumar Awadhiya, filed as Annexure A-14 to the Compilation No.II to O.A. clearly substantiates the plea taken by the respondents to the effect that the Railways follows the norm of rounding off in the same manner in which the respondents had agitated the plea before the Department as well as before the Tribunal, no contrary view can be taken and, therefore, no error has been committed by the Tribunal in allowing the O.A.

8. We have considered the submissions made before us and have perused the material available on record. 4 WRIA No. - 15257 of 2025

9. The facts of the case are not in dispute and the only question to be considered by this Court is as to whether the respondents are entitled to get benefit of the provision for rounding off as contained in para 204.5 of IREM Volume I and whether the stand taken by the petitioners is correct. First of all, it is necessary to reproduce the relevant para 204.5 of IREM Volume I which is contained in General Instructions of IREM meant for promotion from Group-C posts to Group-B posts. The paragraph 204.5 reads as under:- “Para 204.5 of IREM Vol-I: No moderation of the marks is permissible. No rounding off is permissible in marks for individual Answers for the questions. However, total marks in decimal of 0.5 and more should be rounded off to next higher integer figure. Similarly, total marks in decimal of less than 0.5, should be rounded off to lower integer figure.”

10. A bare perusal of para 204.5 would indicate that rounding off is not permissible in marks for individual answers for the questions put in the written examinations, however, the same is permissible with reference to the total marks obtained by a candidate. For instance, if in five questions in a written examination, candidate obtains 1.5 marks each, he would obtain total 7.5 marks. As per paragraph 204.5, rounding off 1.5 marks corresponding to each question to 2 marks is not permissible, however, rounding off total 7.5 marks to 8 marks is permissible. Such rounding off is, indeed, permissible only when the marks in decimal are 0.5 and more and not permissible when the same are less than 0.5 marks, in which case, rounding off would be done to lower integer figure.

11. The bone of contention raised on behalf of the petitioners is based upon a letter dated 26.12.2022 issued by the Deputy Director (Establishment) (GP)-III, Railway Board wherein para 204.5 of IREM Volume I has been sought to be clarified that rounding off or moderation of marks is permissible only while preparing the final result of selection. It would be appropriate to quote the said letter dated 26.12.2022, which reads as under:- 5 WRIA No. - 15257 of 2025 “GOVERNMENT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF RAILWAYS (RAILWAY BOARD) **** No. E(GP)2018/2/31 The General Manager (P), Southern Railway, Chennai. New Delhi, dated: 26.12.2022 (Kind Attn. :Smt. Shikha Lal, Dy. CPO (G)) Sub.: Regarding applicability of provision of rounding off of total marks in CBT examinations held as part of Selections and LDCEs for promotion from Gr. ‘C’ to Gr. ‘B’. Ref.: Southern Railway’s letter No. P(G)CON/Policy/CBT dated 20.12.2022. With reference to Southern Railway’s aforementioned letter dated 20.12.2022, it is clarified that rounding off or moderation of marks as provided for in Para 204.5 of IREM Vol. I is permissible only while preparing the final result of Selection. With regard to other queries posed in the letter, like applicability of rounding off while placing a candidate under ‘outstanding category’ and in LDCE, the action taken by Southern Railway earlier may please be advised. Besides, the provision contained in para 201.1 of IREM VOL.I clearly stipulates that the instructions contained therein are applicable for Selections. sd/- (Meenakshi Saluja) Dy. Director, Estt. (GP)-III Railway Board Ph. No.23047250 E.mail [email protected]” (emphasis by us)

12. A bare perusal of the aforesaid letter dated 26.12.2022 would indicate that it is addressed to the General Manager (P), Southern Railway, Chennai. It cannot be treated as a decision of the Board itself so as to allegedly clarify para 204.5 of IREM Volume I. Nothing has been brought before us to indicate that IREM Volume I contains any provision/amended provision to the effect that rounding off or moderation of marks is permissible only while preparing the final result of selection. Therefore, letter dated 26.12.2022 cannot be treated to have 6 WRIA No. - 15257 of 2025 any statutory force. Even assuming that it has some significance and also binding on the petitioners, the same, when examined in the light of material on record, would belie the contention advanced on behalf of the petitioners, based upon letter dated 26.12.2022.

13. In this regard, we may reproduce para 4.16 of the O.A. wherein the respondents had cited instance of rounding off in favour of one Sujeet Kumar Awadhiya. The said paragraph reads as under:- “ 4.16. That it is relevant to mention here that the applicants through their representations dated 26.07.2024 have presented examples of rounding off the total marks in decimal of 0.5 and more rounded off to next higher integer figure as declared by East Coast Railway, Bhubaneswar dated 09.05.2024 in which Sujeet Kumar Awadhiya has been shown at Sl. No.12 was given 59.52 marks, rounded off to 60 and who has been qualified for Viva voce. A photo copy of letter dated 09.05.2024 issued by East Coast Railway Bhubaneshwar is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure No.A-14 to the Compilation No.II to this Original Application”

14. The evidence in support of contention raised in paragraph 4.16 formed part of Annexure A-14 to the O.A. The same indicates that in a written test namely Computer Based Test (CBT) for Group-B selection, Special Drive against 70 % quota (2023-24) was held on 17.03.2024 and result of 38 candidates was declared wherein final marks were awarded in decimals such as 79.86, 76.53, 59.52, 55.44, 53.61, 51.70 and so on. One Sujeet Kumar Awadhiya obtained 59.52 marks in the said written examination and was allowed to appear for viva voce, which was held on

26.04.2024 and, based upon the marks obtained in written test and viva voce, final select list was published on 09.05.2024, wherein 59.52 marks obtained by Sujeet Kumar Awadhiya were rounded off to 60. Similar is the situation with regard to other candidates in whose cases also rounding off was done. The following tabulated depiction of the final select list dated 09.05.2024 would clarify the situation as under :- SN Name (Shri) Designation/ Station Marks obtained CBT out of 100 (Rounded off) Marks Obtained in Record of Service & Viva voce out of 50 1 Udaya Kumar Sahoo SSE(TM)/HQ/ BBS 80

38.2 Total marks obtained in CBT and Record of Service &Viva voce out of 150 118.2 7 WRIA No. - 15257 of 2025 69 69 69 SSE (PW)/VBL 77 75 SSE(TM)/HQ /BBS SSE(W)/ Con/WAT SSE(PW)/ KRPU SSE(PW)/ WAT SSE(PW)/ DWZ SSE(PW)/ JJKR SSE(TM)/ KUR SSE(W)/ Con/VSKP SSE (Drg)/ WAT Safety Cons/SBP 64 65 65 60 69 64 43 38.7

46.2

45.6

40.1 46

41.7

46.4

41.7

41.6 37 120 113.7

115.2

114.6

109.1 115

106.7

111.4

105.7

105.6 97 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 P Naga Prasad Ram Lochan Sahu P Sreenivasa Rao Ramesh Kumar Singh Jadon K G P Babu Rao Ashok Sitaram Hedaoo Nepal Roy 9 Jagadish Subash Chandra Dash 10 V Kumar J Kumar Sujeet Awadhiya Kumar Prasanna 12 11

15. A special feature of the aforesaid select list stands reflected from 4th Column thereof, title whereof is ‘Marks obtained in CBT out of 100 (rounded off)’. All the marks shown in the said column indicate their position after rounding off the marks. The next Column is meant for ‘Marks obtained in Record of Service & Viva voce out of 50’. It, therefore, reflects that rounding off was done by the Department qua the marks obtained in CBT only i.e. the written test held on 17.03.2024 in that process of selection. Therefore, the submission made on behalf of the petitioners that rounding off is permissible only while preparing the final result of selection, does not stand substantiated from the method of selection adopted by the petitioners themselves.

16. Since the aforesaid contention was specifically raised by the respondents before the Tribunal by pleading as well as with supporting evidence, we may now examine the defence taken by the petitioners in their counter affidavit filed before the Tribunal. Para 17 of the counter affidavit contains response to paragraphs 4.14 to 4.20 of the O.A. and reads as under:- “17- That in reply to the contents of Paragraphs No.4.14 to 4.20 of the Original Application, it is humbly submitted that another request of applicants dated 26.07.2024 enclosing results of other railways, where rounded off of marks was done were received in the office of the answering respondents. The request of both applicants were 8 WRIA No. - 15257 of 2025 forwarded to Railway Board for further clarification/direction vide letter dated 06.08.2024.”

17. The aforequoted response by the petitioners does not at all answer the plea of discrimination raised by the respondents and by not responding to the same, the petitioners have utterly failed to justify their stand in the present proceedings qua the stage when rounding off principle is applicable and, therefore, the submission advanced on behalf of the petitioners cannot be accepted.

18. The Tribunal, in the order impugned before us, has dealt with para

204.5 of IREM Volume I as it reads and has rightly applied the same in favour of the respondents with reference to the material available on record and in view of the discussion made above, we do not find any perversity in the order impugned and are of the view that denial on the part of the petitioners to permit the respondents from appearing in viva voce, was an act de hors the provisions contained in paragraph 204.5 of IREM Volume I and also contrary to the method of rounding off adopted by the petitioners themselves in other selection proceedings of same group and based upon same para 204.5.

19. Consequently, we do not find any merit in the writ petition and the same is, therefore, dismissed. (Kshitij Shailendra, J) (Arun Bhansali, CJ) October 10, 2025 Jyotsana JYOTSANA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

challenged by the respondents before the Tribunal contending that since the qualifying marks were 60, had marks obtained by the respondents been rounded off to 60, they would have qualified for viva voce.

5. The Tribunal, after considering the case of the parties, found that the respondents were entitled to get benefit of the provision of rounding off as contemplated under para 204.5 of IREM Volume I and granted relief to them, as noted above.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that though para 204.5 of IREM Volume I provides for rounding off marks to next higher integer figure when the total marks in decimal are 0.5 and more, since, as per the clarification made by the Department on 26.12.2022, such rounding off is permissible only while preparing the final result of 3 WRIA No. - 15257 of 2025 selection, as communicated to the respondents vide orders impugned before the Tribunal, the respondents, merely based upon their performance in written examination, could not raise a plea of rounding off, inasmuch as, the next two stages of selection, i.e. viva voce and award of marks based upon record of service, were still left and, hence, even if the provision for rounding off was to be applied, such occasion/stage had not arisen in the case of the respondents and, therefore, the orders impugned before the Tribunal were valid and the Tribunal has erred in allowing the OA granting relief to the respondents.

7. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submits that language used in para 204.5 of IREM Volume I is plain and simple and it is only after the written examination is over and marks are awarded, rounding off is to be done and not as suggested on behalf of the petitioners. It is further contended that before the Tribunal, specific stand was taken on behalf of the respondents that through the representations made by them before the Department they had cited examples of rounding off total marks in case of selection made by East Coast Railway, Bhubaneswar on 09.05.2024 in which, one Sujeet Kumar Awadhiya, shown at Serial No.12 was awarded 59.52 marks which were rounded off to 60 and he qualified for viva voce. Submission is that the said averment was inappropriately responded to by the petitioners in the counter affidavit filed before the Tribunal and once the evidence qua Sujeet Kumar Awadhiya, filed as Annexure A-14 to the Compilation No.II to O.A. clearly substantiates the plea taken by the respondents to the effect that the Railways follows the norm of rounding off in the same manner in which the respondents had agitated the plea before the Department as well as before the Tribunal, no contrary view can be taken and, therefore, no error has been committed by the Tribunal in allowing the O.A.

8. We have considered the submissions made before us and have perused the material available on record. 4 WRIA No. - 15257 of 2025

9. The facts of the case are not in dispute and the only question to be considered by this Court is as to whether the respondents are entitled to get benefit of the provision for rounding off as contained in para 204.5 of IREM Volume I and whether the stand taken by the petitioners is correct. First of all, it is necessary to reproduce the relevant para 204.5 of IREM Volume I which is contained in General Instructions of IREM meant for promotion from Group-C posts to Group-B posts. The paragraph 204.5 reads as under:- “Para 204.5 of IREM Vol-I: No moderation of the marks is permissible. No rounding off is permissible in marks for individual Answers for the questions. However, total marks in decimal of 0.5 and more should be rounded off to next higher integer figure. Similarly, total marks in decimal of less than 0.5, should be rounded off to lower integer figure.”

10. A bare perusal of para 204.5 would indicate that rounding off is not permissible in marks for individual answers for the questions put in the written examinations, however, the same is permissible with reference to the total marks obtained by a candidate. For instance, if in five questions in a written examination, candidate obtains 1.5 marks each, he would obtain total 7.5 marks. As per paragraph 204.5, rounding off 1.5 marks corresponding to each question to 2 marks is not permissible, however, rounding off total 7.5 marks to 8 marks is permissible. Such rounding off is, indeed, permissible only when the marks in decimal are 0.5 and more and not permissible when the same are less than 0.5 marks, in which case, rounding off would be done to lower integer figure.

11. The bone of contention raised on behalf of the petitioners is based upon a letter dated 26.12.2022 issued by the Deputy Director (Establishment) (GP)-III, Railway Board wherein para 204.5 of IREM Volume I has been sought to be clarified that rounding off or moderation of marks is permissible only while preparing the final result of selection. It would be appropriate to quote the said letter dated 26.12.2022, which reads as under:- 5 WRIA No. - 15257 of 2025 “GOVERNMENT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF RAILWAYS (RAILWAY BOARD) **** No. E(GP)2018/2/31 The General Manager (P), Southern Railway, Chennai. New Delhi, dated: 26.12.2022 (Kind Attn. :Smt. Shikha Lal, Dy. CPO (G)) Sub.: Regarding applicability of provision of rounding off of total marks in CBT examinations held as part of Selections and LDCEs for promotion from Gr. ‘C’ to Gr. ‘B’. Ref.: Southern Railway’s letter No. P(G)CON/Policy/CBT dated 20.12.2022. With reference to Southern Railway’s aforementioned letter dated 20.12.2022, it is clarified that rounding off or moderation of marks as provided for in Para 204.5 of IREM Vol. I is permissible only while preparing the final result of Selection. With regard to other queries posed in the letter, like applicability of rounding off while placing a candidate under ‘outstanding category’ and in LDCE, the action taken by Southern Railway earlier may please be advised. Besides, the provision contained in para 201.1 of IREM VOL.I clearly stipulates that the instructions contained therein are applicable for Selections. sd/- (Meenakshi Saluja) Dy. Director, Estt. (GP)-III Railway Board Ph. No.23047250 E.mail [email protected]” (emphasis by us)

12. A bare perusal of the aforesaid letter dated 26.12.2022 would indicate that it is addressed to the General Manager (P), Southern Railway, Chennai. It cannot be treated as a decision of the Board itself so as to allegedly clarify para 204.5 of IREM Volume I. Nothing has been brought before us to indicate that IREM Volume I contains any provision/amended provision to the effect that rounding off or moderation of marks is permissible only while preparing the final result of selection. Therefore, letter dated 26.12.2022 cannot be treated to have 6 WRIA No. - 15257 of 2025 any statutory force. Even assuming that it has some significance and also binding on the petitioners, the same, when examined in the light of material on record, would belie the contention advanced on behalf of the petitioners, based upon letter dated 26.12.2022.

13. In this regard, we may reproduce para 4.16 of the O.A. wherein the respondents had cited instance of rounding off in favour of one Sujeet Kumar Awadhiya. The said paragraph reads as under:- “ 4.16. That it is relevant to mention here that the applicants through their representations dated 26.07.2024 have presented examples of rounding off the total marks in decimal of 0.5 and more rounded off to next higher integer figure as declared by East Coast Railway, Bhubaneswar dated 09.05.2024 in which Sujeet Kumar Awadhiya has been shown at Sl. No.12 was given 59.52 marks, rounded off to 60 and who has been qualified for Viva voce. A photo copy of letter dated 09.05.2024 issued by East Coast Railway Bhubaneshwar is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure No.A-14 to the Compilation No.II to this Original Application”

14. The evidence in support of contention raised in paragraph 4.16 formed part of Annexure A-14 to the O.A. The same indicates that in a written test namely Computer Based Test (CBT) for Group-B selection, Special Drive against 70 % quota (2023-24) was held on 17.03.2024 and result of 38 candidates was declared wherein final marks were awarded in decimals such as 79.86, 76.53, 59.52, 55.44, 53.61, 51.70 and so on. One Sujeet Kumar Awadhiya obtained 59.52 marks in the said written examination and was allowed to appear for viva voce, which was held on

26.04.2024 and, based upon the marks obtained in written test and viva voce, final select list was published on 09.05.2024, wherein 59.52 marks obtained by Sujeet Kumar Awadhiya were rounded off to 60. Similar is the situation with regard to other candidates in whose cases also rounding off was done. The following tabulated depiction of the final select list dated 09.05.2024 would clarify the situation as under :- SN Name (Shri) Designation/ Station Marks obtained CBT out of 100 (Rounded off) Marks Obtained in Record of Service & Viva voce out of 50 1 Udaya Kumar Sahoo SSE(TM)/HQ/ BBS 80

38.2 Total marks obtained in CBT and Record of Service &Viva voce out of 150 118.2 7 WRIA No. - 15257 of 2025 69 69 69 SSE (PW)/VBL 77 75 SSE(TM)/HQ /BBS SSE(W)/ Con/WAT SSE(PW)/ KRPU SSE(PW)/ WAT SSE(PW)/ DWZ SSE(PW)/ JJKR SSE(TM)/ KUR SSE(W)/ Con/VSKP SSE (Drg)/ WAT Safety Cons/SBP 64 65 65 60 69 64 43 38.7

46.2

45.6

40.1 46

41.7

46.4

41.7

41.6 37 120 113.7

115.2

114.6

109.1 115

106.7

111.4

105.7

105.6 97 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 P Naga Prasad Ram Lochan Sahu P Sreenivasa Rao Ramesh Kumar Singh Jadon K G P Babu Rao Ashok Sitaram Hedaoo Nepal Roy 9 Jagadish Subash Chandra Dash 10 V Kumar J Kumar Sujeet Awadhiya Kumar Prasanna 12 11

15. A special feature of the aforesaid select list stands reflected from 4th Column thereof, title whereof is ‘Marks obtained in CBT out of 100 (rounded off)’. All the marks shown in the said column indicate their position after rounding off the marks. The next Column is meant for ‘Marks obtained in Record of Service & Viva voce out of 50’. It, therefore, reflects that rounding off was done by the Department qua the marks obtained in CBT only i.e. the written test held on 17.03.2024 in that process of selection. Therefore, the submission made on behalf of the petitioners that rounding off is permissible only while preparing the final result of selection, does not stand substantiated from the method of selection adopted by the petitioners themselves.

16. Since the aforesaid contention was specifically raised by the respondents before the Tribunal by pleading as well as with supporting evidence, we may now examine the defence taken by the petitioners in their counter affidavit filed before the Tribunal. Para 17 of the counter affidavit contains response to paragraphs 4.14 to 4.20 of the O.A. and reads as under:- “17- That in reply to the contents of Paragraphs No.4.14 to 4.20 of the Original Application, it is humbly submitted that another request of applicants dated 26.07.2024 enclosing results of other railways, where rounded off of marks was done were received in the office of the answering respondents. The request of both applicants were 8 WRIA No. - 15257 of 2025 forwarded to Railway Board for further clarification/direction vide letter dated 06.08.2024.”

17. The aforequoted response by the petitioners does not at all answer the plea of discrimination raised by the respondents and by not responding to the same, the petitioners have utterly failed to justify their stand in the present proceedings qua the stage when rounding off principle is applicable and, therefore, the submission advanced on behalf of the petitioners cannot be accepted.

18. The Tribunal, in the order impugned before us, has dealt with para

204.5 of IREM Volume I as it reads and has rightly applied the same in favour of the respondents with reference to the material available on record and in view of the discussion made above, we do not find any perversity in the order impugned and are of the view that denial on the part of the petitioners to permit the respondents from appearing in viva voce, was an act de hors the provisions contained in paragraph 204.5 of IREM Volume I and also contrary to the method of rounding off adopted by the petitioners themselves in other selection proceedings of same group and based upon same para 204.5.

19. Consequently, we do not find any merit in the writ petition and the same is, therefore, dismissed. (Kshitij Shailendra, J) (Arun Bhansali, CJ) October 10, 2025 Jyotsana JYOTSANA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad