AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Raj Vir Sharma, J
Brief facts: The applicant is an ex-serviceman. The office of the Joint Secretary(Trg.) & CAO, Ministry of Defence, Government of India, issued the vacancy circular dated 7.1.2016 (Annexure A/2) inviting applications for filling up 2 posts of Sanitary Inspector in Armed Forces Headquarters/ISOs, Ministry of Defence, by deputation (including short term contract). While in service, the applicant responded to the same and got his application forwarded to the respondent for selection as he fulfilled the eligibility criteria. When the applicant did not get any response from the respondent, he made applications under the RTI Act to get information about the result of selection. The applicant got the information (vide Annexure A/13) that there were in all eight candidates and he was one of them for selection. He and another person were found eligible for selection, whereas other six candidates were ineligible for selection. The applicant was also informed that the aforesaid vacancy circular dated 7.1.2016 was cancelled by the respondent owing to administrative reasons" as per the notice published in the Employment News 13-19 January 2018 (Annexure A/14), and that a new vacancy circular dated 1.2.2018 (Annexure A/16) was issued by the respondent to fill up the aforesaid two posts of Sanitary Inspector.
Immediately after receipt of the above information, the applicant made arepresentation dated 23.3.2018(Annexure A/17) requesting the respondent to consider his candidature along with others. There being no response from the respondent to his representation, the applicant filed the O.A. on 4.5.2018 seeking the following reliefs:
"(a) Allow the present application and issue appropriate directions to Respondent to appoint the applicant as sanitary inspector in integrated headquarters of Ministry of Defence/Defence Staff Headquarers and Iner Service Organizations eiher as per the vacancy circular No.A.37974/S-11/CAO/R-III dated 07.06.2016 (Annexure A/2) or as per the vacancy circular No.A/37974/S-11/CAO/R-III dated 01.02.2018 (Annexure A/16) as the applicant has already been found eligible for the said post by the Respondent (Annexure A/13).
(b) Pass any other or further order/directions as this Hon"ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case."
The following interim relief was also prayed for by the applicant:
"During the pendency of the present application, the representation of the Applicant dated 23.03.2018 (Annexure A/17) may be considered for appointment as Sanitary Inspector during the pendency of the present application and in case the applicant is not selected/considered for selection, the final result of the selection may be withheld during the pendency of the present application before this Tribunal."
The applicant also filed MA No.2038 of 2018 (in OA No.1826 of 2018) seeking the following interim relief:
"a. Allow the present application and either direct the respondent to hold eligible in the vacancy circular of 2018 also and appoint him on the post of sanitary inspector during the pendency of the present application or withhold the final selection of sanitary inspector in the Ministry of Defence against the vacancy circular of 2018 (Annexure A/16) in view of the peculiar facts and circumstances mentioned above during the pendency of the present accompanying application.
b. Pass any further order(s) as this Hon"ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present application."
The O.A. along with M.A.No.2038 of 2018 was placed before the Bench for preliminary hearing on the questions of admission and of interim relief on 9.5.2018 when the Tribunal directed issuance of notice to the respondent, and Mr.Rohit Sehrawat, learned proxy counsel for Shri Hanu Bhaskar, accepted notice on behalf of the respondent and undertook to file counter reply to the O.A.within four weeks. The Tribunal also issued ashort notice on the question of interim relief and directed the matter to be listed on 24.5.2018 for hearing on the prayer for interim relief.
No counter reply/objection to the prayer for interim relief/MA No.2038 of 2018 was filed by 24.5.2018.
On 24.5.2018, we heard Mr.M.A.Niyazi, learned counsel appearing for the applicant, and Mr.Hanu Bhaskar, learned counsel appearing for the respondent, on the prayer for interim relief/MA No.2038 of 2018.
It was contended by Mr.M.A.Niyazi, learned counsel appearing for the applicant that there existed no administrative grounds" to cancel the vacancy circular dated 7.1.2016 and to issue the fresh vacancy circular dated 1.2.2018. Out of the eight candidates, who responded to the circular dated 7.1.2016, six candidates were found ineligible, and the applicant and another were found eligible for selection and appointment. Instead of finalizing the selection pursuant to the vacancy circular dated 7.1.2016 and offering appointment to the applicant and other eligible cand idate, the respondent has acted arbitrarily and mala fide in getting the vacancy circular dated 7.1.2016 cancelled and in issuing the fresh vacancy circular dated 1.2.2018 for filling up the said two posts with a view to deny appointment to the applicant and other eligible candidate and to frustrate their legitimate claim. Therefore, it is a fit case where the Tribunal should direct the respondent to withhold the selection process pursuant to the fresh circular dated 1.2.2018, and to appoint the applicant and other eligible candidate on the two posts of Sanitary Inspector as they have been found eligible for selection pursuant to the vacancy circular dated 7.1.2016, subject to the final outcome of the present O.A.
Per contra, it was contended by Mr.Hanu Bhaskar, learned counsel appearing for the respondent that the vacancy circular dated 7.1.2016 having cancelled owing to administrative grounds, the applicant cannot claim appointment on the basis of application made by him pursuant thereto. The applicant not having responded to the fresh vacancy circular 1.2.2018 is not entitled to be considered along with others who have applied for selection pursuant thereto.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the rival submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties, we direct the respondent to consider the candidature of the applicant and the candidatures of other persons who had responded to the vacancy circular dated 7.1.2016, along with the candidatures of the persons who have responded to the fresh vacancy circular dated 1.2.2018, and to finalize the selection process, subject to the outcome of OA No.1826/18.
With the above observation and direction, the prayer for interim relief and MA No.2038 of 2018 are disposed of.
The respondent shall file counter reply by 2.7.2018. Rejoinder reply, if any, shall be filed by the applicant by 23.7.2018. The O.A. shall be listed before appropriate Bench on 24.7.2018 for hearing.