Sudhamani M.N. vs Union of India (UOI)

C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J.—Petitioner is challenging Ext.P5 order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, whereunder her claim for promotion to the post of JTO is turned down by the Tribunal. We have heard counsel appearing for the petitioner and standing counsel appearing for the BSNL. On going through the Tribunal''s order, we find that petitioner claims the benefit of Ext.P3 which provides for reduction in minimum marks in the departmental examination for the last examination held in 2000. Admittedly petitioner did not participate in this examination and she wrote the examination that was held in 1999. Under Ext.P3 relaxation is only for the last examination held in 2000, and so much so it does not apply to the examination held in 1999. So much so the Tribunal rightly held that petitioner is not entitled to relaxation from minimum marks of 40% to 30%. Further Ext.P3 applies only for filling up existing vacancies. The finding of the Tribunal and the contention of BSNL is that no vacancy exists for consideration of the petitioner, even assuming that she could be considered for relaxation from the minimum marks. Consequently, we find no merit in the WPC and the same is dismissed.