T.A. No. 8/2010. Case: 1. Bharti Yadav D/o K. S. Yadav, 2. Ritesh Kumar S/o Ravinder Kumar Vs 1. Union of India, Through Secretary, Ministry of Health, 2. Director, All India Institute of Medical Sciences. Central Administrative Tribunal
| Case Number | T.A. No. 8/2010 |
| Counsel | Rahul Nagpal, Sanjeev Joshi, Mukul Gupta |
| Judges | Shanker Raju (Judicial Member) & Dr. Veena Chhotray (Accountant Member) |
| Issue | Constitution of India, 1950 - Articles 14, 15(1), 16(2) |
| Judgement Date | September 21, 2010 |
| Court | Central Administrative Tribunal |
Judgment:
Dr. Veena Chhotray (Accountant Member), (Principal Bench New Delhi)
-
The TA 8/2010 has arisen from the WP(C) 12569/2009 transferred by the Delhi High Court vide its order dated January 08, 2010. Both the applicants in this TA are empanelled candidates for the posts of Medical Social Service Officer Grade-II under the AIIMS on the basis of a selection process initiated vide an advertisement in the year 2006. As the applicants could not be appointed despite their empanelment; through this TA they have sought directions for appointing them in this post as per the final result notification no.38/2007 dated 4.6.2007. A prayer for temporary appointment to this post pending the final disposal of the writ petition has also been made; which, however, has not been acceded to.
The learned counsels, Shri Rahul Nagpal and Shri Sanjeev Joshi proxy counsel for Shri Mukul Gupta would appear before us respectively on behalf of the applicants and the respondents. We have carefully considered the submissions by the learned counsels as well as the material on record including a subsequent clarification obtained from the respondents at the behest of the Tribunal.
-
The brief facts are that the applicants, (OBC) had responded to an advertisement by the AIIMS in January 2006 advertising 9 posts of Medical Social Service Officer Grade-II to be filled by way of Direct Recruitment. These comprised 4 posts reserved for the OBC. After a written test followed by interview, a select panel of 9 candidates was prepared in which the applicants had ranked at serials 8 and 9 under the OBC category. The final result notification no. 38/2007 was issued by the respondents vide their communication dated 4.6.2007 stating that the names of the empanelled candidates had been recommended to this post, subject to verification of their eligibility, character & antecedents as well as medical fitness. These were to be followed by issue of offer letters. However, as these offer letters never saw the light of the day in favour of the applicants; they made a number of representations during the years 2007-2009 followed by a legal notice as well. No response to these has occasioned the present TA.
-
The stand of the respondents is that the initial advertisement of 9 posts had been issued taking into account the three existing and six contemplated vacancies for which the process of creation had been initiated. Further it is stated that the select list of 9 candidates had been...
To continue reading
Request your trial