OA-4070/2012. Case: Sh. Sukhbir Singh, Sh. Baljeet, Sh. Ishwar Singh Rathi and Sh. Ranjit Singh Vs Union of India & Ors.. Central Administrative Tribunal

Case NumberOA-4070/2012
CounselFor Appellant: Sh. Manjeet Singh Reen, Advocate and For Respondents: Sh. A.K. Singh, Advocate
JudgesV. Ajay Kumar, Member (J) and Shekhar Agarwal, Member (A)
IssueConstitution of India - Articles 14, 16
Judgement DateAugust 07, 2013
CourtCentral Administrative Tribunal


Shekhar Agarwal, Member (A), (Principal Bench, New Delhi)

  1. The applicants, who are 4 in number, are aggrieved by their non-selection for the post of Junior Reception Officer (JRO). They have sought the following relief:-

    (i) That this Hon'ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to direct the respondents to call for all relevant records for promotion to the post of Junior Reception Officer (JRO) before this Hon'ble Tribunal.

    (ii) That this Hon'ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to allow this original application and set aside the impugned notification dated 21.5.2012 issued by respondent no. 3 for conducted the selection for the post of Junior Reception Officer (JRO).

    (iii) That this Hon'ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to allow this Original Application and direct the respondents to Review the Selection procedure for the post of Junior Reception Officer (JRO) on the basis of Seniority-cum-Suitability according to the Recruitment Rules dated 16.2.2012 issued by respondents.

    (iv) That any other or further relief which this Hon'ble Tribunal may be deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case may also be granted in favour of the applicants.

    Facts of the case are that the respondents on 16.02.2012 notified Recruitment Rules (RRs) for the post of JRO and decided to fill 14 vacant posts as per these RRs. According to these Rules, these posts were to be filled by promotion of Multi Task Staff (MTS) (Reception) working in the pay band of Rs. 5200-2000 plus grade pay of Rs. 1800/- having 11 years of regular service in that grade. The RRs also provided that while the promotion was to be on non-selection basis, the candidates would be required to qualify a suitability test. The suitability test devised by the respondents consisted of following components:-

    (i) Assessment report from the
    CAD/Ads - 40 marks

    (ii) Written Test - 30 marks

    (iii) Interview - 30 marks

    It was further provided that the candidates had to secure atleast 40% marks in each of these components.

  2. The respondents held the written examination on 10.07.2012. On 06.09.2012 the respondents issued a panel of 14 names of those candidates who had been found fit for promotion. The name of the applicants did not figure in this list. Hence they made representations to the respondents against denial of promotion. Since no satisfactory reply was received from the respondents, they have filed this O.A. before us.

  3. The applicants have challenged the action of the...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT