AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Nita Chowdhury, J
The applicant has filed this Original Application, seeking the following reliefs:-
"8.1 That this Hon‟ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to allow this original application and set-aside the impugned Reversion order dated 08.06.2015 with all consequential benefits.
8.2 That the Hon‟ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to allow this original Application and direct the respondent to restore the original position of the applicant as LDC in the interest of justice.
8.3 That this Hon‟ble Tribunal direct the respondents to call for the relevant records of the respondents regarding dealing of the case for promotion to the post of LDC in the interest of justice.
8.4 That any other or further relief which this Hon‟ble Tribunal may be deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case may also be granted in favour of the applicant.
8.5 That the cost of the proceedings may also be awarded in the favour of the applicant."
The relevant facts of this case are that the respondents had notified Recruitment Rules for the post of LDC in the year 1998. Respondent No.2 - Government of India, Ministry of Finance, vide letter dated 12.06.2009 informed respondent No.1 - Debts Recovery Tribunal - I that the appointment authority in respect of DRTs is presiding officer and he is competent to take decision for giving promotion to the Group D‟ employees to the post of LDC in DRT-I, Delhi. Accordingly, a DPC considered the case of the applicant for promotion to the post of LDC on 09.11.2010. On 03.01.2011, the applicant was promoted to the post of LDC on probation for a period of two years and had successfully completed the probation of two years on 03.01.2013. On attaining the age of 45 years, the applicant was exempted from passing the typing test from 26.06.2014 in terms of provisions contained in DoPT OM dated 29.09.1992. However, on 08.06.2015, on the basis of a complaint made by some person, respondent issued reversion order dated 08.06.2015 by which the applicant was reverted to the post of MTS without any show cause notice. Hence, this OA.
Respondents have filed a counter affidavit in which they have stated that in terms of the Recruitment Rules and the extant recruitment policy of the Government, 90% of the vacant posts of LDCs were to be filled by direct recruitment through SSC, failing which by deputation and failing which by absorption. The rest of the vacancies were to be filled by promotion from amongst Group "D"employees through departmental examination subject to the conditions and the other relevant criteria as therein prescribed but the same being inapplicable to the facts of the present case. Therefore, the post of LDCs were to be filled up by deputation, failing which by promotion.
We heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records.
It is borne out from the facts that the respondent no.1 - Ministry of Finance itself, vide communication dated 12.06.2009, stated that the appointing authority in respect of Group D‟ employees is the Presiding Officer, who is competent to take a decision for giving promotion to the applicant to the post of LDC in DRT - I, Delhi. This fact has not even been controverted by the respondents.
However, as regards the exemption from passing the typing test, the applicant has filed a DoPT Circular dated 29.09.1992, the relevant para of which reads as under:-
"(2) When exemption may be allowed:-
(a) If above 45 years of age on the date of their appointment may be granted exemption from the date of their appointment."
Quite clearly, the applicant had attained the age of 45 years on 30.04.2014 and had been granted such exemption w.e.f. 26.06.2014 in terms of the aforesaid DoPT Circular dated 29.09.1992. Thus, the DoPT Circular dated 29.09.1992 is squarely applicable to the case of the applicant.
In this view of the matter, the impugned order being unsustainable is quashed; and we declare that/hold that the applicant is entitled to all consequential service benefits in accordance with law.
Resultantly, the OA is allowed with the above directions. No order as to costs.