Original Application No. 2868/2009 with Original Application No. 523/2010. Case: 1. Dr. Rajeev Kumar S/o Ram Pramod Singh, 2. Dr. Manisha Sinha W/o Dr. Sachin Budhiraja Vs 1. Union of India, Through Secretary, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, 2. Principal, Vardhman Mahavir Medical College, 3. Medical superintendent, Safdarjung Hospital, New Delhi, 4. Dr. A. K. Rai, HOD (ENT), Safdarjung Hospital, New Delhi, 5. Secretary, National Commission for OBCs, 6. Dr. Varun Gupta, Senior Resident (ENT), Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia Hospital. Central Administrative Tribunal

Case Number:Original Application No. 2868/2009 with Original Application No. 523/2010
Party Name:1. Dr. Rajeev Kumar S/o Ram Pramod Singh, 2. Dr. Manisha Sinha W/o Dr. Sachin Budhiraja Vs 1. Union of India, Through Secretary, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, 2. Principal, Vardhman Mahavir Medical College, 3. Medical superintendent, Safdarjung Hospital, New Delhi, 4. Dr. A. K. Rai, HOD (ENT), Safdarjung Hospital, New Delhi, 5. Secretary, National Commission for OBCs, 6. Dr. Varun Gupta, Senior Resident (ENT), Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia Hospital
Counsel:V. K. Rao, Rakesh Dhingra, A. K. Bhardwaj
Judges:V. K. Bali (Chairman) & L. K. Joshi (Vice Chairman)
Issue:Central Civil Services (Temporary Service) Rules, 1965
Judgement Date:September 14, 2010
Court:Central Administrative Tribunal
 
FREE EXCERPT

Judgment:

V. K. Bali (Chairman), (Principal Bench New Delhi)

1. By this common order, we propose to dispose of two Original Applications bearing number 2868/2009 and 523/2010, as common questions of law and facts are involved in both the matters. Learned counsel representing the parties suggest likewise by confirming that the facts in both the cases are absolutely identical. We may, however, extract the facts from OA No.2868/2009 in the matter of Dr. Rajeev Kumar.

2. The applicant, a Senior Resident in the ENT Department, Safdarjung Hospital, seeks setting aside of order dated 8.10.2009 vide which he has been relieved from the Hospital strength. While issuing notice in the OA, we had stayed operation of the order aforesaid, which is continuing till date. We had dismissed the OA initially vide order dated 16.2.2010, but our order was challenged by the applicant in a writ petition filed in the Delhi High Court, which has since been allowed. During pendency of the writ petition, we are told, the Hon'ble Bench protected the applicant by interim directions, which, as mentioned above, are continuing till date.

3. Brief facts, as may need to be mentioned at this stage, are that the applicant is an OBC and had worked as Senior Resident (ENT) from 11.9.2006 to 29.8.2008 in the Aruna Asaf Ali Hospital, New Delhi, against a 'non-teaching post'. He resigned from the said post and applied for and was appointed as Senior Resident in the ENT Department of the Safdarjung Hospital w.e.f. 30.8.2008 for a period of three years against a 'teaching post'. Vide memorandum Annexure A-2, on recommendation of the selection committee, the Medical Superintendent, Safdarjung Hospital, offered the applicant the post of Senior Resident in the department of ENT in the pay scale of '10940-11650 on the terms mentioned therein. The post was to be temporary on tenure basis for a period of three years including ad hoc period and Senior Residency done in any other Government recognized institution, if any. The applicant was to be on probation for one year during which his services could be terminated forthwith, without giving any notice or indicating any reason therefor, and thereafter he was to be governed by the provisions contained in CCS (Temporary Service) Rules, 1965. When the applicant had put in ten months' service as Senior Resident, it came to the notice of the respondents that he had earlier worked in the Aruna Asaf Ali Hospital as Senior Resident (ENT) for about two years. He was, therefore, issued a memo asking him to explain why he had suppressed the fact of his earlier assignment while applying for the Senior Residency in Safdarjung Hospital. The applicant responded to the show cause notice, wherein he stated that he had not informed the respondents about his earlier assignment as he was not, at the relevant time, in possession of the experience certificate of having worked in the said assignment, and that the experience certificate was issued to him later on 18.2.2009. It appears that the explanation furnished by the applicant was not found to be satisfactory, and vide order dated 18.10.2009, he has been relieved from the Hospital strength.

4. The respondents entered appearance on notice issued by this Tribunal and filed their counter reply, wherein it is inter alia pleaded that as per Government of India notice dated 17.6.1996 (Annexure R-1), as mentioned in para...

To continue reading

REQUEST YOUR TRIAL