Union of India vs Kewal Krishan Indoria

Rajiv Sharma, J.—This petition is directed against the order dated 10.5.2013 passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh in R.A. No. 103/2012 in O.A. No. 268/HP/2012.

Key facts necessary for adjudication of this petition are that respondent No. 1 preferred an O.A. No. 268/HP/2012 before the learned Central Administrative Tribunal Chandigarh seeking following reliefs:-

I. That applicant herein is challenging the actions of the respondent No. 1 to the extent that it has denied him a rightful review of the year of allotment to the I.P.S. and the consequential re-fixation of seniority. Resultantly he is impugning the order dated 18.05.2010 (A-1) whereby he has wrongly been allotted the year 2000 against the vacancy of year 2005 and Select List of year 2006. His year of allotment accordingly is liable to be revised to the year 1999 instead of 2000 (which has been wrongly calculated with reference to year 2006 instead of 2005) along with consequential benefits.

II. The Office Memorandum dated 25.08.2010 (A-5) is being impugned to the extent that the benefit of the law as laid down in Praveen Kumar''s case has been decided to be granted only with prospective effect i.e. w.e.f. 01.02.2010.

III. The applicant is also impugning the letter dated 23.03.2011 (4) vide which the respondent No. 1 has declined his representation to grant him any benefit under the above said revised DOPT instructions dated 25.08.2010 issued in pursuance to the judgment passed by the Hon''ble Punjab and Haryana High Court and upheld by the Hon''ble Supreme Court in Praveen Kumar''s case.

The O.A. No. 268/HP/2012 was dismissed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal Chandigarh vide order dated 10.10.2012. Respondent No. 1 preferred review application No. 103/2012 in O.A. No. 268/HP/2012 on the basis of two judgments rendered by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal Chandigarh in O.A. No. 1031/HP/2011, titled Arvind Kumar Sharda and others vs. Union of India dated 9.8.2012 and O.A. No. 400/2010, titled Om Prakash Sharma vs. Union of India, dated 25.5.2011. Learned Central Administrative Tribunal Chandigarh on the basis of judgments rendered in the case of Arvind Kumar Sharda and others Vs. Union of India and Om Prakash Sharma vs. Union of India allowed the review application and the original application preferred by respondent No. 1 was allowed. The Union of India was directed to take necessary action for revision of the year of allotment of the applicant to 1999 instead of 2000 with all consequential benefits. The respondent No. 1 was held entitled to the benefit of decision in Praveen Kumar''s case.

Mr. Ajit Sharma, learned Advocate, has vehemently argued that the facts involved in Arvind Kumar Sharda and Om Prakash Sharma cases were distinguished from the facts and circumstances of the present case. However, he has failed to point out how the facts were distinguishable. Learned Central Administrative Tribunal Chandigarh was bound by the earlier judgments given by its coordinate benches in Arvind Kumar Sharda and Om Prakash Sharma cases. Once the learned Central Administrative Tribunal Chandigarh has taken a view that Arvind Kumar Sharda was entitled to the benefit of Praveen Kumar''s case, it could not take a different view.

In view of discussion and observations made hereinabove, there is no merit in the writ petition and the same is dismissed. Pending application(s), if any, also stands dismissed. No order as to costs.