AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
By Hon’ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J):-
The present Original Application (OA) has been filed by the applicants, 63 in number under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals‟ Act 1985 seeking the following reliefs:-
“(a)Direct the Respondents to consider the cases of the Applicants under the applicable Personnel Policy for Group „A‟ S&T Officers dated 19.09.2016, in terms of the judgment dated 12.08.2026 passed by this Hon‟ble Tribunal in OA No. 3393/2023, without treating the fact that the Applicants were promoted to the Group „A‟ post of Scientist-B after 19.09.2016 as an absolute bar to their consideration, and subject to fulfillment of the prescribed eligibility conditions;
(b)Direct the Respondents to consider and decide the representations submitted by the Applicants in accordance with the judgment dated 12.08.2026 and the law laid down therein, within a time-bound period as may be prescribed by this Hon‟ble Tribunal;
(c)Direct the Respondents, upon the Applicants being found eligible and suitable, to grant them the consequential benefits flowing from such consideration, including all consequential promotional and monetary benefits, in accordance with the applicable rules and law;
(d)Pass such other or further order(s) as this Hon‟ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case.”
Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are currently Group-A officers in the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology and were promoted to the post of Scientist-B for the year 2024–2025. He submits that under the Office Memorandum dated 19.09.2016 concerning the promotion policy for Group-A officers, an artificial distinction was created that adversely affected those officers who had initially joined in non-Group-A (or below Group-A) posts. He further submits that senior batches of the applicants had previously approached this Hon‟ble Tribunal in OA No. 3393/2026, which was allowed vide order dated 12.08.2026 with certain directions. He contends that the present applicants are similarly situated to the applicants in OA No. 3393/2026 and have approached the respondents seeking the same relief, however, their representations have remained unanswered.
Issue notice. Ms. Manupriya Verma Rawat, learned counsel, who appears for respondents on advance service, accepts notice. She seeks sometime to file counter reply and/or to seek instructions from the department.
We have heard the learned counsel for the parties. We note that the issue faced by the applicants is similar to, and squarely covered by, the issue already decided in OA No. 3393/2026.
In view of above, it would be appropriate to dispose of the present OA at admission stage itself with direction to the Competent Authority amongst the Respondent No. 2 to consider the grievances of the applicants in light of the order dated 12.08.2026 passed by this Tribunal in OA No. 3393/2026, and to dispose of the pending representations of the applicants by passing a reasoned and speaking order within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this Order.
The OA is disposed of in the above manner. Pending MA, if any, also stands disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs.