Smt. Poonam Kumari vs Union Of India & Ors.

By Hon’ble Mr. Justice Om Prakash-VII, Member (J)

The present O.A. has been filed by the applicant under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 with the following prayers:-

The applicant was initially appointed as Stenographer in grade pay of Rs. 2400/- . She has been promoted on 28.5.2015 in the grade pay of Rs. 4200/-.Again she has been promoted to the grade pay of Rs. 4800/- on 25.10.2019. A Notification dated12.8.2022 was issued ,notifying the vacancies of Group B post under 30% departmental quota in grade pay of Rs. 5400/-. Applicant applied against the aforesaid notification. From perusal of notification dated 12.8.2022, it is clearly demonstrates that the eligibility criteria have been mentioned in column 3 by which column 3(3) specially provides that appendix 3 examination ought to have been cleared by the candidate and column 3(4) provides about 5 years completion of qualifying service in the grade pay of Rs. 4200 and in pay grade of Rs. 4600/- Both the conditions were fulfilled by the applicant but respondents did not include the name of applicant in the eligibility list dated 17.10.2022 without assigning any reason. Further they have passed another order dated 11.11.2022, by which they have rejected the claim of the applicant disclosing the sole reason that she did not fulfill the terms and conditions of column 3(4) of the notification dated 12.8.2022. Applicant submitted representations dated 4.11.2022 and 7.11.2022, requesting therein to consider her eligibility for the aforesaid departmental examination under notification dated 12.8.2022 which is pending for disposal.

In the counter reply, it is stated that applicant has detailed that she was promoted to the grade pay of Rs. 4200/- in Stenographer cadre and thereafter qualified Appendix III exam of Accounts Department and was promoted to Grade pay Rs. 4800/-. It is further stated that applicant has deliberately mentioned only the grade pays of the above mentioned promotions not mentioning the designation / post to which she was actually promoted to. It is further stated that although the applicant had applied in pursuance of notification dated 12.8.2022 but she was not eligible to apply due to not fulfilling the conditions laid down in para 3 of the notification dated 12.8.2022. Para 3(4) of notification stipulates the eligibility conditions. The applicant should have rendered five years regular service as Sr.S.O. /Sr. TTA/ Sr. ISA GP 4800) or Accounts Assistant (or Stock Verifier). Applicant had never worked in Account Assistant or Stock verifier.

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

Submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that service rendered in the parent department shall be taken into consideration for counting the eligibility criteria. Since applicant has completed the five years in the grade pay of Rs. 4200/- and 4600/-thereafter, she was transferred to new department, where she was in the grade pay of Rs. 2400/- for few days, thereafter, she was promoted in the grade pay of Rs. 4200/- and 4600/-. It is next argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant had worked for more than 5 years as Stenographer in the Accounts Section itself. Subsequent, a notification issued by different zones specifically stipulates that Stenographers who had worked in Accounts Section and have completed more than 5 years of service, will also be eligible for the promotion. Thus, argued that O.A. be allowed. Respondents be directed to permit the applicant to appear in the promotional examination. In support of claim of the applicant, learned counsel for applicant has also filed following case laws:-

Learned counsel for the respondents argued that if different zones of Railways have committed illegality, the respondents cannot be directed to commit the same mistake. Notification issued by the respondents does not contain the eligibility criteria for Stenographers who are working in the Accounts Section. Referring to the eligibility criteria and impugned notification, it was next argued that Stenographers are not included in the notification for promotional post, thus, there is no illegality, infirmity and perversity in the impugned order.

We have considered the rival submissions of the parties and have gone through the entire record.

It is settled principle of law that for considering eligibility criteria for promotional post, services rendered in the parent department shall also be counted and to be taken into consideration. The aforesaid proposition of law finds support with the law laid down in the aforesaid cases.

It is also evident from record that applicant had applied for the promotional post against the notification dated 12.8.2022 but her candidature was not allowed on the ground that in the new department, she has completed in the Accounts Section only one year and 10 months. Eligibility criteria contains that employee who have completed five years in the grade pay of Rs. 4200/- and Rs. 4600/- shall only be eligible for promotional post. Notification issued for the same post by different zones contains that Stenographers who had worked in the Accounts Section and have completed eligibility criteria of five years shall also be eligible for promotional post in Group ‘B’. Thus, it emerges that what is contained in the notification issued by the respondent is contrary to the conditions imposed in the notification issued by different zones of Railway. Since the representation said to have been moved by the applicant before the respondents is still pending and different zones of the Railway department have allowed the Stenographers working under the Accounts Section, who have completed the eligibility criteria of five years to appear in the examination, thus at this stage, we are of the view that O.A. may be disposed of with the direction to the respondents to decide the representations of the applicant dated 4.11.2022 and 7.11.2022 by passing a reasoned and speaking order within a stipulated period of time.

Accordingly, O.A. is disposed off with direction to the respondents to decide the representation of the applicant dated 4.11.2022 and 7.11.2022within a period of 15 days from today by passing a reasoned and speaking order and decision so taken shall be communicated to the applicant forthwith. While deciding representations of the applicant if the respondents found that applicant is eligible for promotional post notified through the aforesaid notification, she will be permitted to appear in the examination. It is made clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the merit of the case.

There shall be no order as to costs. All MAs pending in this O.A. also stands disposed off..