Central Administrative Tribunal - Lucknow
Mitthan Lal Meena vs Union Of India on 25 August, 2020
} 2 ye >» CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL feun gy.
LUCKNOW BENCH (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING) O.A.N0.332/00132/2020 Decided on: 25.08.2020 HON'BLE MR. SANJEEV KAUSHIK, MEMBER (J) HON'BLE MR. A.MUKHOPADHAYA, MEMBER (A) Mitthan Lal Meena, aged about 31 years, son of Shri Ram Karan Meena, R/o B-35, Berry Marg, VG colony, Alambagh, Lucknow.
Applicant (BY ADVOCATE: MR. PRAVEEN KUMAR) Versus
1. Union of India through the General Manager, Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi-110001.
2.The Chief Works Manager, Loco Shop, Northern Railway, Charbagh, Lucknow.
Respondents (BY ADVOCATE: MS. PRAYAGMATI GUPTA) OR DER(ORAL) HON'BLE MR. SANJEEV KAUSHIK, MEMBER (J) The present Original Application (0.A) has been filed by applicant for quashing of the order dated 2.3.2020 (Annexure A-1), whereby the representation dated 26:12.2019 of the applicant for grant of benefit arising out of Writ petition No. 9152 (SB) of 2016 titled ASHISH KUMAR OJHA VS. UNION OF INDIA & OTHERS, decided by the High Court (Lucknow Bench) on 12.7.2018, has been rejected on the ground that he was not a party.
2. Notice.
3. Ms. Prayagmati Gupta, Advocate accepts notice.
4. The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the impugned order is non-speaking and as such deserves to be quashed as the authorities have not even considered the ratio laid down in the case of Ashish Kumar Ojha (supra) while rejecting the claim of the applicant. He argues that in that case a similarly situated person sought appointment against a Group 'D' post. This was rejected by the Department on the ground of Shri Ojha not possessing the 10 pass qualification, whereas according to him it was 8'" pass under old Rules applicable to him and the 3 advertisement for selection was issued in 2007. This rejection was challenged by Mr. Ashish Kumar Ojha (applicant therein) in the Lucknow Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal through O.A. No. 21/2015 which was dismissed on 30.11.2015. Review Application was also dismissed on 21.1.2016., Against this, he went to the Hon'ble High Court which allowed the claim vide order dated 12.7.2018. It was held therein that the Circular dated 9.12.2010 providing for a minimum qualification of 10'" pass or ITI, cannot be applied to candidates where the related recruitment process was_ initiated prior to the issue of the 9/12/2010 Circular. In short, it was held that the Circular would apply with prospective effect on recruitment initiated after the date of its issue. The claim of the present applicant is that his claim has been rejected without considering the ratio laid down in the f indicated case and as such impugned order is illegal and arbitrary.
5. Ms. Prayagmati Gupta, Advocate, counsel for the respondents is not in a position to controvert the factual scenario, as pointed out by the learned counsel for the applicant. She submits that claim of applicant was rightly rejected as he was not a party to the specific decision relied upon by him. .
46. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the entire. matter and are of the considered opinion that the impugned order, (Annexure A-1), rejecting the claim of the applicant only on the ground that he was not a party to the case relied upon by him and not considering the ratio laid down therein is not sustainable in the eyes of law and as such, it is quashed and set aside.
7. The respondents are directed to re-consider the claim of the applicant by taking into consideration the fact and effect of ratio laid down in the case of Ashish Kumar Ojha (supra), and if the applicant is found to be similarly situated person, extend him the due benefit; else a reasoned and speaking order be passed and communicated to him, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Needless to mention that disposal of the O.A. in the aforesaid manner may not be construed as an expression of any opinion on the merits of the case.
8. There shall be no order on costs.
(SANJEEV KAUSHIK) MEMBER (J) (A. MUKHOPADHAYA) MEMBER (A) HC* |