AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Nita Chowdhury, Member (A)
Both parties were present and heard.
The order dated 12.09.2016 passed in OA No.473/2016 was as follows:
"12. In view of the above, we are inclined to allow this O.A. and direct the respondents to convene a review meeting of the Selection Committee to reconsider the candidature of the applicant again in accordance with law and in the light of observations made above. They may do so within a period of 08 weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. The respondents may proceed with fresh selection notified by them vide their Notification dated 10.12.2015 only after the case of the applicant has been reconsidered as mentioned above. No costs."
Learned counsel for the respondents appeared and informed that he has filed his compliance affidavit and submitted that the respondents have fully complied with the orders of the Tribunal. He further submitted that the candidature of the applicant for the post of Jt. Director of Enforcement was reconsidered by the Selection Committee of CVC in its meeting held on 13.10.2016 and based upon the applicant's overall experience, performance rating and suitability, the Committee did not recommend the appointment of the applicant as a Jt. Director of Enforcement Department. In this view of the matter, the order dated 12.09.2016 as passed by this Tribunal stands satisfied and in view of the factual position submitted above, respondents have not committed any contempt.
However, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant has not been informed in writing of the minutes of the DPC in which his candidature for Jt. Director is said to have been considered and hence he is not in a position to really accept that the orders of the Tribunal have been complied with.
The minutes of the meeting of Selection Committee of CVC held on 13.10.2016 to review the recommendation of the Committee dated 30.06.2015 in respect of the applicant were put up by the respondents and the same were perused. The minutes of the meeting show that the Selection Committee has in fact considered in detail the case of Sh. Mohd. Fareed, the applicant in the present CP, and they have taken into account the entire service record and his experience in the last 10 years in the field of intelligence, investigation and adjudication/prosecution work relating to fiscal/criminal laws. Based on the factual position with regard to his experience in the fields of intelligence and investigation and the fact that his average grading was found to be less than that of almost all the other members considered in the same meeting and thus he could not make the requisite grade. In view of the aforesaid position, the Selection Committee did not recommend the appointment of applicant as a Jt. Director of Enforcement Department.
We have perused the records and Selection Committee findings and find that the respondents have complied with the orders of the Tribunal. Accordingly, in view of the substantial compliance of the orders of the Tribunal, no contempt is made out and accordingly, the same is closed. Notices are discharged. However, if any grievance still subsists, the applicant is at liberty to approach this Tribunal in accordance with law, if so advised.