Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Saurabh Kumar vs M/O Earth Science on 23 May, 2018
1 OA 1443/18
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
PRINCIPAL BENCH
O.A.NO.1443 OF 2018
New Delhi, this the day of May, 2018
CORAM:
HON'BLE SHRI RAJ VIR SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER
AND
HON'BLE MS. PRAVEEN MAHAJAN, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER
................
1. Saurabh Kumar,
Aged About 28 Years,
S/o Gopal Prasad Avasta,
R/o 1-232, Amita Sadan, Bargadwa,
Gorakhpur, UP-273007
2. Abhishek Singh
Aged About 27 Years,
S/o Ram Singh,
R/o A-1009, H.A.L Township
Korwa, Amethi, UP-227412
3. Brijesh Kumar
Age about 28 years,
S/o Hemraj Rao,
R/o VPO-Kasani, Teh-Chirawa,
District-Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan-333029
4. Jagpal Singh
Age about 33 years,
S/o Biram Pal Singh,
R/o Village-Talheri Khurd,
PO-Deoband, Saharanpur, UP-247554
5. Bhoopendra Singh Patel
Aged About 27 years,
S/o Ram Jiyawan Patel,
R/o Village - PatupurDohari,
Post-Bikapur, District-Faizabad, UP 224204
6. Bhargava Thakkellapati
Age about 28 years,
Page 1 of 37
2 OA 1443/18
S/o T.Venkateshwrlu,
R/o D.No. 7-157, Adigoppula,
Guntur, Andhra Pradesh-522612
7. Abhishek
Age about 30 years,
S/o Indu Kumar Sharma,
R/o Village-Bhadwa, Post-Itasang, P.S.-Rahui,
District-Nalanda, Bihar-803119
8. Shilpa
Age about 27 years,
D/o Satbir Singh,
R/o 180, First floor, Pocket A-3,
Sector-7, Rohini, New Delhi-110085
9. Abhishek Singh
Aged About 25 Years,
S/o Mahendra Singh,
R/o 81/15, Yadav Market, Barra-2
Kanpur, UP-208027
10. Sushant Kumar
Age about 30 years,
S/o Hari Prasad Singh,
R/o Village-Nirpur, Post- Bariarpur,
Munger, Bihar-811211
11. Kartikey Dutta
Age about 22 years,
S/o Sushil Dutta,
R/o Shanti Sadan, Kayasthpada,
Dholpur, Rajasthan-328001
12. Atul Kumar
Age about 27 years,
S/o HareKrishna Baranwal
R/o Village-Kharkuwan, Post-Bhojpur,
P.S.-Devipur
Deoghar, Jharkhand
13. Vinay
Age about 28 years,
S/o Virendra Singh,
Page 2 of 37
3 OA 1443/18
R/o H.No. 1087, Sector-I,
Rohtak, Haryana-124001
14. Piyush Gyan Jha
Age about 28 years,
S/o Suresh Chandra jha,
R/o Road No.3, Sector-5, Magistrate Colony,
Patna, Bihar-800025
15. Ashok Kumar Saini
Age about 23 years,
S/o HajariLal Saini,
R/o Village-Binderwara, Post-Sikandra,
District-Dausa, Rajasthan-303326
16. Abhilash Kumar Patel
Age about 27 years,
S/o Ram Pratap Patel,
R/o Village+Post-Hirdenagar,
District-Mandla, MP-48166
17. Pankaj Kumar Meena
Age about 25 years,
S/o KalyanSahai Meena,
R/o C-20, Vasudevnagar,
Dausa, Rajasthan-303303
18. Varma Satyaprakash Munnalal
Age about 27 years,
S/o Munnalal Verma,
R/o Village-Dighwal, Post-Sarwatkhani,
District-Bhadohi, UP-221314
19. Rohit Kumar
Age about 26 yeras,
S/o K.N. Prasad,
R/o New Colony, Tilatand,
Katrasgarh, Jharkhand-828114
20. Raghib Akhter
Age about 23 years,
S/o Sajid Alam,
R/o Village-Sontha, Perwan Toli,
Post-Sontha,
Page 3 of 37
4 OA 1443/18
District-Kisanganj, Bihar-855115
21. Aakash Kumar
Age About 26 years,
S/o Sanjay Kumar,
r/o House No.66/6, Chota Bajar, Meham,
District-Rohtak, Haryana-124112
22. Mahboob Ali
Age about 23 years,
S/o Sharif Ahmad,
R/o Village-Said, Nagli,
Amroha, UP-244242
23. Abhijeet
Age about 22 years,
S/o Rajiv Sharma,
R/o House No.528, Huda Sector-13,
Bhiwani, Haryana-127021
24. Ashutosh
Age about 24 years,
S/o Raj Narain Yadav,
R/o House No.24-4, Kharaiya, Pokhra,
Basaratpur, UP
25. Amit Kumar Mittal
Age about 25 years,
S/o Mohan Lal Mittal,
R/o House No.33A, Extension 2,
Near PC Kaushik, Ex-MLA gali
Nangloi, New Delhi-110041
26. Surendra Pratap Yadav
Age about 29 years,
S/o Rajaram Yadav,
R/o Village-Mallupur, Post-Gonauli,
Jaunpur, UP-222175
27. Aakib Hussain Dugga
Age about 27 years,
S/o Sawlath Hussain Dugga,
R/o SarnalBala, K.P. Road,
Anantnag, J&K
Page 4 of 37
5 OA 1443/18
28. Priyanka Juyal
Age about 23 years,
D/o Nagendra Sharma Juyal,
R/o 110. Sector-14, SiddharthNiketan,
Kaushambhi, Ghaziabad
29. Amit Kumar
Age about 29 years,
S/o Devendra Prasad Singh,
R/o Village-KhoriPakar, Govind, Post-Amnour
District-Saran, Bihar-841401
30. Praveen Kumar Sharma
Age about 25 years,
S/o Mali Ram Sharma,
R/o Plot No.16, Balaji Vihar 21,
Near Devdhara Colony, Murlipura Scheme
Jaipur, Rajasthan
31. Jaikaran
Age about 29 years,
S/o Motilal Thakur,
R/o Village & Post-Banuri, Tehsil-Palampur,
District-Kangra, H.P.
32. Rimmy Aggarwal
Age about 25 years,
D/o Ram dhari Bansal,
R/o 1179, Sector-80,
Mohali, Punjab
33. Abhinav
Age about 26 years,
S/o P.C. Jangla,
R/o 100 United India apartment,
Mayur Viha, Phase-I Extesnion
New Delhi-110091
34. Anurag Yadav
Age about 23 years,
S/o Sarvendra Singh,
R/o Village-Mirzapur Sai, Post-Nidhauli Khurd
District-Etah, U.P. -207001
Page 5 of 37
6 OA 1443/18
35. Pawan Kumar
Age about 29 years,
S/o Ram Panni Singh,
R/o Mainpura, Danapur Cantt
Patna, Bihar-801503
36. Suthirtho Boral
Age about 25 years,
S/o Supriyo Boral,
R/o North Shaktigarh, Birati
Kolkata, West Bengal-700051
37. Vishal Kumar
Age about 26 years,
S/o Arvind Chaudhary,
R/o Village-Bhawanipur, Durnia
Bihar-854204
38. Amit Kumar Chandel
Age about 29 years
S/o Kalaka Prasad Chandel,
R/o Plot No.16, Balaji Vihar 21,
Near Devdhara colony, Murlipura Scheme
Jalaun, U.P.
39. Prashant Meena
Age about 27 years,
S/o Ram Charan Meena,
R/o Jhalawar
Rajasthan
40. Abiram Kumar
Age about 31 years,
S/o Ram Swaroop Prasad,
R/o New Colony,
Gaya, Bihar
41. Nitesh Kuma Yadav
Age about 26 years,
S/o Puneet Yadav,
R/o Karmik Nagar Saraidhela,
Dhanbad, Jharkhand
Page 6 of 37
7 OA 1443/18
42. Vishal Mandaiya
Age about 27 years,
S/o Mohan Lal Mandaiya,
R/o R2F -772/16, Gali no. 13, Rajnagar,
Part-2, Palam Colony
New Delhi.
43. Mahesh Prasad
Age about 25 years,
S/o Jagdamba Prasad Dobhal,
R/o H.no.12, Village - Ghengadegaon (Selur),
Post - Kandikal,
Tehri, Uttarakhand
44. Deepanshu Sharma
Age about 25 years,
S/o Prem Prakash Sharma,
R/o B-273, Sector-I, Avantika
Rohini, New Delhi-110085
45. Ashutosh Jha
Age about 26 years,
S/o Narendra Nath Jha,
R/oo WZ- 745-F, Palam Village
New Delhi-110045
46. Nilesh Kumar
Age about 23 years,
S/o Umashankar Chourasia,
R/o Plot No.1-D, Vikas Nagar, Phase-2
Uttam Nagar, New Delhi-110059
47. Abhishek Kumar Meena
Age about 28 years,
S/o Kishor Kumar,
R/o 71, Sadar Bazar Cantt,
Faizabad, U.P. -224001
48. Satish Kumar,
Age about 26 years,
S/o Chintu ram,
R/o Village & Post Kasba, Nonera,
Tehsil - Shahabad,
District - Baran, Rajasthan
Page 7 of 37
8 OA 1443/18
49. Bicky Kumar
Aged about 25 years,
S/o Sh. Rinku Kumar,
R/o Village - Jakarpura, Suryagarh,
Lakhisarai, Bihar - 811106
50. Gaurav Kumar
Aged about 27 years,
S/o Sh. Padam Singh,
R/o P-32/33A, Chanakya Place part-2
New Delhi-110059.
51. Sandeep Kumar Gaurav
Aged about 27 years,
S/o Bheekamber Singh
R/o 1/450 Ambedkar Colony
Near Big Idol, Naurangabad
Chhawani, Aligarh
52. Abhijeet Chaudhary
Aged about 24 years,
S/o Satendra Singh
R/o Village : Bahadurpur, PO-Sathla
Tehsil-Mawana, Meerut (U.P.)
250402
53. Narendra Kumar
Aged about 27 years,
S/o Gopal Yadav
R/o Village : Arabaria Naiyadih
P.S. Sono, Jamui
Bihar-811314
54. Pankaj Kumar
Aged about 27 years,
S/o Rajanand Prasad Singh
R/o Village - Luthfalichak
Post- PS. Nalanda,
Bihar-803111
55. Ashwini Kumar Prasad
Aged about 28 years
S/o Subhash Chandra
Page 8 of 37
9 OA 1443/18
R/o 748 L Sarvodya Nagar Bichhiya Post-PAC
Camp, Gorakhpur, UP -273014
56. Pawanjeet
Aged about 30 years,
S/o Lumbraj Singh Chauhan
R/o Ashapura Public School
Chandravardai Nagar
Ajmer, Rajasthan 305003
57. Ayush Srivastava
Aged about 26 years,
S/o Kuldeep Srivastava
R/o 2/L/338 Indra Gandhi Nagar
Jagatpura, Jaipur-302017
58. Naresh KumarBaghel
Aged about 25 years,
S/o Murari lal
R/o Nai Ki Sarai, Jalesar Road, Tedi Baghiya
Agra -282006
59. Vikash Kumar
Aged about 26 years,
S/o Om Prakash Gupta
R/o Prakash bhawan, Dhibra par, Jehanabad
Bihar 804408
60. Ankur Garg
Aged about 22 years,
S/o Devender Garg
R/o 216/6 Gandhi Nagar Rewari,
Haryana 123401
61. Amit Kumar Dixit
Aged about 29 years,
S/o Subhash Chanda
R/o D/43- A, ST No.5,
West Jyoti Nagar, Delhi-110094
62. Navendu Kumar
Aged about 25 years
S/o Santosh Kumar Srivastava
R/o Ward no.23, Pandey Tola, Narkatiyaganj
Page 9 of 37
10 OA 1443/18
West champaran, Bihar 845455
63. Rajat Kaushik
Aged about 23 years,
S/o Ajay Kaushik
R/o 11/61 Kaushik Bhawan, Street no.8
West Azadnagar, New Delhi 1100051
64. Harshit Goel
Aged about 30 years,
S/o Ashok Kumar Agarwal
R/o Arihant Nagar, Phase 2, Singhpur
Sarnath Varanasi, U.P. 221007
65. Shailendra kumar Sharma
Aged about 27 years,
S/o Ram mohansharma
R/o Mela ground, Mahwa,
Dausa, Rajasthan -321608
66. Ashish Yadav
Aged about 23 years,
S/o Yog Raj Yadav
R/o 1266 FF sector 22-B,
Chandigarh -160022
67. Tanveer Hussain Parray
Aged about 25 years,
S/o Mohd. Ishaq Parray
R/o Gund Hassi Bhat, Srinagar
J&K- 190017
68. Ravikesh Meena
Aged about 23 years,
S/o Ramhans Meena,
R/o Ganesh Nagar, Agra Road, Dausa
Rajasthan -303303
69. Poonam Bala
Aged about 27 years,
D/o Raghubir Singh
R/o VPO-Bass Badshapur, Tehsil-Hansi
Hisar, Haryana 125042
Page 10 of 37
11 OA 1443/18
70. Madhu Sharma
Aged about 27 years,
D/o Ramesh Chand Sharma
R/o A-62 Varun Vihar, Paldi Meena
Jaipur, Rajasthan
71. Nitesh chandel
Aged about 25 years,
S/o Kuldeep Singh
R/o Vill - Daboh, PO-Bagwara
Tehsil - Tauni Devi
Hamirpur, Himachal Pradesh 177021
72. Bharat Kumar Patel
Aged about 27 years,
S/o Mool Chand Patel
r/o Vill- Kotra, PO-Jetawara, Tehsil-Reodar
Sirohi Rajasthan
73. Mantosh Singh
Aged about 28 years,
S/o R.V Singh
R/o Ratitalai, Banswara (Rajasthan)
74. Amit Jaiswal
Aged about 26 years
S/o O.P. Jaiswal
R/o Mankapur, Gonda (UP)
75. Neha Kapoor,
Aged about 23 years,
D/o Rajive Kapoor
R/o 3, Jnanendra Avenue, Uttarpara
Hooghly, West Bengal 712258
76. Vishnu yadav
Aged about 27 years,
S/o Thakurdeen Yadav
R/o Vill - Modaha, Dakshin,
Faizabad, U.P. - 224001
77. Nadeem Danish
Aged about 28 years,
S/o Md. Maroof
Page 11 of 37
12 OA 1443/18
R/o Paharpur, Simri, Bakhtiarpur
Saharsa, Bihar
78. Prabhat Kumar
Aged about 30 years,
S/o Jai Kishor Tiwari
R/o Shakti Nagar, Thana -Muffasil,
Saran, Bihar 841301
79. Varun Gupta
Aged about 28 years,
S/o Swami Nath Gupta
R/o 139/1 A Bhulai Ka Pura, Govindpur,
Allahabad, U.P. -211004
80. Mamatha
Aged about 22 years,
D/o P.Eswara Reddy
r/o 20-238-1 B Yaleru, Brahmana
Anantapur, Andhra Pradesh 515002
81. Yogendra Singh
Aged about 28 years,
S/o Sri. Mahendra Singh
R/o 8/117 1/6, New Lawyers Colony,
Dayalbagh
Agra, UP -282005
82. Prashant Sharma
Aged about 26 years,
S/o Hari Shankar Sharma
R/o 14/228 M P Colony, Bikaner,
Rajasthan 374004
83. Alok Kumar
Aged about 27 years,
S/o Ashok Kumar
R/o Village - kuwan Devchand, Patti,
Kandharapur, Azamgarh, U.P.
84. Naveen Kumar Kumbhare
Aged about 25 years,
S/o Prabhakar Kumbhare
Page 12 of 37
13 OA 1443/18
R/o Arvi Road, Panchavatinagar
Pipri, Wardha, Maharashtra
85. Akshay Kumbhore
Aged about 25 years
S/o Meghram Kumbhare
R/o Near Vitthalrukhmini Mandir,
Paunibhandara, Maharashtra
86. Shilpa singh
Aged about 29 years,
D/o K B Singh
R/o 875 1-2 block, Gaur Grandeur,
Sector 119, Noida
87. Umag Dangi
Aged about 25 years,
D/o Gyan Swarup Dangi
R/o 11, DR M.N. Ghosh Road, Raniganj,
Pin - 713347, District-Paschim Bardhaman,
West Bengal
88. V. Venkata Pradeep Kumar
Aged about 27 years,
S/o Nageswara Rao,
R/o 5-93, Kothagudem Road, Penubali
Khammam, Andra Pradesh, Pin 507302
89. Vinod Singh Rawat
Aged about 27 years,
S/o Padam Singh
R/o 1013/A Sector 52-B Power Colony,
Chandigarh (160036)
90. Adabala N.V.S Raghavendra Rao
Aged about 26 years,
S/o Adabal Gangaya
R/o 2-34, Padmatipalam, Malkipurummandal
East Godavari District,
Andhra Pradesh 533250
91. Vinay Kumar Rawat,
Aged about 28 years,
S/o Lata Mukteshwar Ram Rawat
Page 13 of 37
14 OA 1443/18
R/o Village-Gausput Post-Bugurgu
District Ghazipur UP-233305
92. Gaurav Negi
Aged about 26 years,
S/o Sushila Negi
R/o Govt Inter College Joshimat
District-Chamoli Uttarakhand
93. Sonawane Vishwajit Nivrutti
Aged about 29 years,
S/o Sonawane Nivrutti Damu
R/o 29, KunjVihar, Sahadevnagar
Gangapur Road, Nasik
94. Dinesh Kumar Mishra
Aged about 25 years,
S/o Narvadeshwar Mishra
R/o Tagore Nagar, Ballia UP-277001
95. Abhilash Nakra
Aged about 27 years,
D/o Satish Nakra
R/o D-15, DCR UST Murthal Sonipat
Haryana-131039
96. Navaneet Kumar
Aged about 25 years,
S/o Ranvijay Singh
R/o Vill&Post-Lashkarpur Tehsil
Biswan (Sitapur)-261201
97. Digant Mohan
Aged about 24 years,
S/o Ashok Kumar
R/o Vill & Post-Ursan, Tehsil-Sikandra
Thana-Derapur District-Kanpur Dehat
Pin-209301
98. Vipin Rawat
Aged about 26 years,
S/o Mohar Singh Rawat
R/o Vill-Vyasbhud (Chakbhud),
Post-Kalsi Gate District-Dehradun
Page 14 of 37
15 OA 1443/18
Uttarakhand-248159
99. Rajendra Triphati
Aged about 27 years,
S/o Ramprakash Tripati
R/o Bamnia Road, Petlawad
District-Jhabua (MP)-457773
100. Amit Gupta
Aged about 24 years,
S/o Kailash Chandra
R/o Opp-Power House ORAI (Jalaun)
UP-285001
101. Ashok Kumar Singh (Aged about 28 years),
S/o Raj Bansh Singh
R/o Vill-Kurusa, PO -Doiyan P.S- Dinara,
Rohtas, Sasaram, Bihar-821112
102. Kunwar Diwakar Singh
Aged about 31 years,
S/o Jila Jeet Singh
R/o Vill-Sungulpur, PO-Gutwan
Thana-Mariahu, District-Jaunpur
UP-222136
103. Alapati Srilakshmi
Aged about 24 years,
D/o Satyanarayana
R/o D-No-3-11/5, Tulasi Residency
Opp-Balaji Park Town Nizanpet
Village-Quthbullapur Rangareddy-500090
104. Vividh Kumar Soni,
Aged about 26 years,
S/o Anil Soni
R/o Vishwanath Colony,
Railway Station Road, Biaora,
Rajgarh MP
105. Durga Prasad Moharana
Aged about 27 years,
S/o Surendra Moharan
R/o Bachhara, Jatani, Khorda,
Page 15 of 37
16 OA 1443/18
Odisha-752050
106. Amol Motinath Veer
Aged about 28 years,
S/o Motinath Veer
R/o Dastgir Gali Main Road,
Ahmadpur Lathur MH-413551
107. G Shiva Teja
Aged about 22 years,
S/o G Rajasekhar Gowd
R/o F-202, Vishnu Apartment,
Opp-Birla Gate, Kurnool Andhra Pradesh
108. Naveen Reddy
Aged about 25 years,
S/o Pearala Vidya Sagar Reddy
R/o 10-74, Rajannagardem, Mothkur,
Mandalam, Nalgonda, AP-508277
109. Renu KR
Aged about 26 years,
D/o Kesavan Potti.K
R/o Souparnikavellanand, Aruvikkara,
Thiruvanthapuram, Kerala-695543
110. Pushpendra Singh Rajawat
Aged about 27 years,
S/o Mahendra Singh Rajawat
R/o Plot no-9, Tilak Nagar, Dhola Bhata,
Ajmer, Rajasthan-305001
111. Gaurav Patel
Aged about 24 years,
S/o Rajendra Singh,
R/o Village -Sutta Thana Gursarai,
Jhansi UP-284202
112. N. Anil Kumar
Aged about 27 years,
S/o Nellutla Mallesh
R/o 6-4-33, Hanuman Colony,
Rampally, Kusara, Mondal Rampalle,
Rampalli AP-501301
Page 16 of 37
17 OA 1443/18
113. Tintu Lal K M
Aged about 26 years,
S/o Suseela
R/o Keecheril, Ezhancheril,
Vellilappally, Ramapuram Kottayam,
Kerala--686651
114. Chenna Rajanaannar
Aged about 24 years,
S/o Chenna Raja Sekhar
R/o 12/87 RS Road,
Dharmavaram, Anantapur,
AP-8515671
115. Dhiraj Kuamr
Aged About 25 years,
S/o Sh. Indradeo Singh,
R/o Gram Nawada, Post Urdina,
Thana Barun, Block Barun
Nawada, Aurangabad, Bihar-824112
116. Archana K.R.
Aged About 27 years,
D/o Sh. Kanaka Das,
R/o Vrindavanam, Chirayankeezhu,
Thiruvanantpuram-695304
117. Lalit Mohan Bangari
S/o J.S. Bangari,
R/o 23, Near ESTC Kaniya, Kaniya
Ramnagar Range, Nainital, Ramnagar,
Uttarakhand, 244715
118. V. Eswararao Patiwada,
S/o Sh. Pydiyya
R/o 2-77/2, Shiradi Nagar,
Yeleswaran, East Godawari,
Andhra Pradesh-533429.
119. Alok Kumar Gupta,
S/o Sh. Uma Shankar Gupta,
R/o 296-J, New Model Colony, BIchhiya,
Railway Colony, Gorakhpur-273012
Page 17 of 37
18 OA 1443/18
120. Abhishek Kumar,
S/o Sh. Ärun Kumar Prasad,
R/o North New Shakti Colony,
Vaishali, Bihar-844101 ...Applicants
(All the applicants are aspirant for appointment to the post of Scientific
Assistant, Group ‗B' in Indian Meteorological Department)
(By Advocate: Mr.M.K.Bhardwaj)
Versus
1. Union of India,
Through its Secretary,
Ministry of Earth Sciences,
Prithvi Bhavan,
Opposite India Habitat Centre,
Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110003
2. The Director General of Meteorology
India Meteorological Department,
Mausam Bhawan, Lodhi Road,
New Delhi-110003
3. The Chairman,
Staff Selection Commission
Block No. 12, CGO (Complex),
Lodhi Road, New Delhi. ..Respondents
(By Advocates: Mr.H.K.Gangwani with Mr.Vidya Sagar and
Mr.Mayank Kapoor for respondent nos. 1 and 2)
............
ORDER
Per RAJ VIR SHARMA, MEMBER(J):
This Original Application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, was filed by the applicants on 9.4.2018 seeking the following reliefs:
Page 18 of 37 19 OA 1443/18
―(i) To quash and set aside the impugned Note/Clarification published on website of Respondent No.2 on 28.03.2018 and direct the respondents to treat the candidates/applicants possessing 4 years degree in engineering in the concerned subject as mentioned in the advertisement/RRs as eligible for appointment to the post of Scientific Assistant in Indian Meteorological Department on the basis of advertisement (Annexure A-
3).
(ii) To declare the action of respondents in declaring the applicants as ineligible for appointment to the post of Scientific Assistant as illegal and direct the respondents to consider the claim of applicants for appointment to the post of Scientific Assistant on the basis of their merit in the competitive examination held by SSC pursuant to Notice of Recruitment of Scientific Assistant in Indian Meteorological Department Examination, 2017.
(iii) To pass any other orders as this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case including quashing of Notice dated 04.08.2017 (A-
2).‖
2. Resisting the O.A., the respondent nos. 1 and 2 have filed a counter reply. The applicants have also filed a rejoinder reply refuting the stand taken by the said respondents.
2.1 Respondent no.3-Staff Selection Commission (SSC) has neither appeared nor filed any counter reply.
3. We have carefully perused the pleadings of the parties and have heard Mr.M.K.Bhardwaj, learned counsel appearing for the applicants, and Mr.H.K.Gangwani with Mr.Vidya Sagar and Mr.Mayank Kapoor, learned counsel appearing for the respondent nos. 1 and 2. Page 19 of 37 20 OA 1443/18
4. The brief facts of this case, which are relevant for the purpose of deciding the controversy and are not disputed by either side, are as follows:
4.1 Respondent no.3-SSC issued/uploaded on its website the notice dated 18.7.2017 (Annexure A/2) for conducting an open competitive examination for recruitment to the post of Scientific Assistant in India Meteorological Department (IMD), Group ‗B'Non-Gazetted, Non-
Ministerial, in Level 6 of the Pay Matrix (Pay Band 2 (Rs.9300-34800) plus Grade Pay Rs.4200 in pre-revised scale) from 20.11.2017 to 27.11.2017 in computer based mode all over the country.
4.2 Paragraph 5 of the notice dated 18.7.2017(ibid) stipulated thus:
―5. MINIMUM ESSENTIAL EDUCATIONAL QUALIFICATIONS: (As on 04.08.2017) Bachelor's Degree in Science (with Physics as one of the subject)/Computer Science/Information Technology/Computer Applications or Diploma in Electronics and Telecommunication Engineering from a recognized Institution/University or equivalent. NOTE-I The qualifying Degree or diploma referred above should be in First Class (60% marks) or 6.75 CGPA on a 10 point scale.
NOTE-II The qualifying Degree or diploma referred above must be of three (3) years duration after (10+2) examination.
NOTE-III The applicant must have passed 10+2 Examination from a Recognized Board or equivalent in Science with Physics and Mathematics as core subjects.
Page 20 of 37 21 OA 1443/18 NOTE-IV As per Ministry of Human Resource Development Notification dated 10.06.2015 published in Gazette of India, all the degrees/diplomas/certificates including technical education degrees/diploma awarded through Open and Distance Learning mode of education by the Universities established by an Act of Parliament or State Legislature, Institutions Deemed to be Universities under Section 3 of the University Grants Commission Act, 1956 and Institutions of National Importance declared under an Act of Parliament stand automatically recognized for the purpose of employment to posts and services under the Central Government provided they have been approved by the Distance Education Bureau, University Grants Commission.
NOTE-V Candidates who have not acquired/will not acquire the educational qualification as on the closing date of receipt of application will not be eligible and need not apply.
NOTE-VI Ex-Servicemen who have done various courses from Armed Forces which are certified by competent Authority that they are equivalent to Bachelor's Degree in Science (with Physics as one of the subject)/Computer Science/Information Technology/Computer Applications or Diploma in Electronics and Telecommunication Engineering are eligible to appear in the Examination.‖ 4.2.1 The Ministry of Earth Sciences, Scientific Assistant Recruitment Rules, 2011 (hereinafter referred to as ―Recruitment Rules‖) prescribed the following educational and other qualifications for direct Page 21 of 37 22 OA 1443/18 recruitment to the post of Scientific Assistant in India Meteorological Department:
―Bachelor's Degree in Science (with Physics as one of the subject)/ Computer Science/ Information Technology/ Computer Applications or Diploma in Electronics and Telecommunication Engineering from a recognized Institution/University or equivalent.
NOTE-I The qualifying Degree or diploma referred above should be in First Class (60% marks) or 6.75 CGPA on a 10 point scale.
NOTE-II The qualifying Degree or Diploma referred above must be of three (3) years duration after (10+2) examination.
NOTE-III The applicant must have passed 10+2 Examination from a Recognized Board or equivalent in Science with Physics and Mathematics as core subjects.‖ 4.3 The respondent-SSC, by another notice dated 4.8.2017, issued certain other instructions regarding the said Recruitment of Scientific Assistant in India Meteorological Department Examination,2017 as per the notice dated 18.7.2017(ibid), and reiterated that the qualifying Degree or Diploma in the listed disciplines must be of three years duration after 10+2 Examination.
4.4 Except applicant nos.7 and 35, all other applicants possessed 4-
year B.Tech Degree in Electronics & Communication Engineering/ Computer Science Engineering/Information Technology/ Electronics Engineering. Applicant nos. 7 and 35 possessed 4-year B.Sc. Engineering in Page 22 of 37 23 OA 1443/18 the relevant disciplines. They responded to the notice dated 18.7.2017(ibid) and applied for appearing at the competitive examination. On the basis of Admit Cards, the applicants appeared at the online examination conducted by the respondent-SSC during 22nd to 25th November 2017. The respondent- SSC declared the marks obtained by the candidates in the recruitment examination and handed over category-wise Merit Lists to the respondent- Department in terms of Paragraph 11(I) read with Paragraph 18(ii) of the notice dated 18.7.2017 (ibid). While so, the respondent-Department issued and uploaded on its website the impugned clarification dated 28.3.2018 which reads thus:
―Regarding appointment of candidates for the post of Scientific Assistant in India Meteorological Department, it is clarified that the candidates having qualifying degree in the listed disciplines must be of 3 years duration after 10+2 examination. In this regard, Staff Selection had issued clarification vide Notice No.3-1/2017-P&P-1 dated 4th August, 2017.
In view of the above, it is further clarified that four year degree holders are not eligible for the post of Scientific Assistant in the India Meteorological Department.‖ 4.5 Being aggrieved by the above clarification, some of the applicants made representations and sent emails and legal notices requesting the respondents to rescind the impugned clarification dated 28.3.2018 and to consider their candidatures as they possess qualification higher than that is required under the Recruitment Rules and the employment notice dated 18.7.2017/notice dated 4.8.2017(ibid). The applicants also claimed that in the absence of any provision in the Recruitment Rules or in the employment Page 23 of 37 24 OA 1443/18 notice dated 18.7.2017 as well as in the notice dated 4.8.2017 issued by the respondent-SSC that ―four year degree holders are not eligible for the post of Scientific Assistant in the India Meteorological Department‖, the impugned clarification dated 28.3.2018 amounts to changing the terms and conditions of the employment notice dated 18.7.1987/notice dated 4.8.2017, after the recruitment examination is over and Merit Lists are prepared and forwarded by the respondent-SSC and, therefore, the impugned clarification is bad, illegal and liable to be withdrawn by the respondent-Department. It was also claimed by the applicants that having possessed 4-year B.Tech Degree in Electronics & Communication Engineer/Computer Science Engineering /Information Technology/Electronics Engineering, and 4-year B.Sc.Engineering in the relevant disciplines, they can by no stretch of imagination be said to be ineligible for selection and appointment to the post Scientific Assistant, for which qualification of 3-year Diploma in Electronics & Communication Engineer/Computer Science Engineering /Information Technology/Electronics Engineering, or 3-year Bachelor's Degree in Science (with Physics as one of the subject) after 10+2 has been prescribed in the Recruitment Rules/employment notice dated 18.7.2017 and notice dated 4.8.2017 (ibid).
4.6 The respondents having failed to consider and take any decision on the applicants' representations, emails and legal notice, the applicants have filed the present O.A. Page 24 of 37 25 OA 1443/18
5. In the above context, it has been contended by Mr.M.K.Bhardwaj, learned counsel appearing for the applicants, that the respondent-Department has acted illegally and arbitrarily in clarifying that ―four year degree holders are not eligible for the post of Scientific Assistant‖. By issuing the impugned clarification dated 28.3.2018, the respondent-Department has changed the rules of recruitment process, after the competitive examination was over and the merit lists were prepared and forwarded by the respondent-SSC, which is impermissible in law. Neither the Recruitment Rules nor the employment notice dated 18.7.2017/notice dated 4.8.2017 (ibid) stipulated that ―four year degree holders are not eligible for the post of Scientific Assistant‖, and, therefore, the impugned clarification is unsustainable in the eyes of law. It has also been contended by Mr.M.K.Bhardwaj that in the year 2011 the respondent-Department had initiated the process of recruitment to the post of Scientific Assistant and, on the basis of selection and recommendation made by the respondent-SSC, appointed a number of candidates having 4-year B.Tech in Computer Science/Information Technology/Computer Applications/Electronics and Telecommunication Engineering. This clearly goes to show that the respondent-Department has acted illegally and arbitrarily in taking a view that 4-year degree holders are ineligible for selection and appointment to the post of Scientific Assistant during the recruitment process initiated vide Page 25 of 37 26 OA 1443/18 employment notice dated 18.7.2017. In support of his contentions, Mr.M.K.Bhardwaj has relied on the following decisions:
(i) State of Haryana vs. Abdul Gaffar Khan, (2006) 11 SCC 153, where the post in question was of Unani Dispenser. The qualification prescribed was:
(i) Unani Dispenser from any recognized Unversity/Institution or Board or Faculty of Indian System of Medicine established by law in India or Upvaidya of any recognized University/Institution or Board or Faculty of Indian System of Medicine established by law in India having the knowledge of Urdue;
(ii) Matric or its equivalent.
(iii) Knowledge of Hindi and English up to Matric standard.
The respondent-candidates possessed the qualification of Bachelor of Unani Medicine and Surgery from Kanpur University apart from Matric with Hindi and 10+2 with Science. The Hon'ble Spreme Court held that the Haryana Ayurvedic/Homeopathic and Unani Technical Group ( C ) Service Rules, 1977 do not exclude the degree in Unani Medicines and Surgery for the post of Unani Dispenser, and that the respondent-candidates possessed the requisite qualifications from recognized University/Institution or Board and were eligible for appointment on the post of Unani Dispenser.
Page 26 of 37 27 OA 1443/18
(ii) Jyoti K.K. and others vs. Kerala Public Service Commission, (2010) 15 SCC 596, wherein the appellants were holders of B. Tech. degree in electrical engineering or bachelor's degree in electrical engineering. On the basis that the appellants did not possess the necessary qualifications, the Commission held that they were not eligible for selection. In the writ petitions, the same having been challenged, it was contended that they possessed higher qualifications and, therefore, non-consideration of their cases was incorrect. They sought for a direction to the Commission to consider them as eligible candidates. It was also pointed out that ever since the inception of the Board, persons possessing higher qualifications have been considered and appointed in terms of Rule 13(1) of the Kerala State and Subordinate Services Rules, 1956 and the Board having accepted higher qualifications to be applicable in all such cases could not have excluded them in the present cases. The Hon'ble High Court dismissed the writ petitions. Allowing the Civil Appeals, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that if a person had acquired higher qualifications, such qualifications would presuppose acquisition of the lower qualification. A degree holder would be eligible to apply for a post, where the minimum qualification prescribed was diploma. When the position was not clear and the rules did not per se disqualify holders of the higher qualifications, it would be appropriate to hold Page 27 of 37 28 OA 1443/18 that those with the higher qualifications would be eligible. Paragraphs 7,8 and 9 of the judgment reads thus:
―7. It is no doubt true, as stated by the High Court that when a qualification has been set out under the relevant rules, the same cannot be in any manner whittled down and a different qualification cannot be adopted. The High Court is also justified in stating that the higher qualification must clearly indicate or presuppose the acquisition of the lower qualification prescribed for that post in order to attract that part of the rule to the effect that such of those higher qualifications which presuppose the acquisition of the lower qualifications prescribed for the post shall also be sufficient for the post. If a person has acquired higher qualifications in the same faculty, such qualification can certainly be stated to presuppose the acquisition of the lower qualifications prescribed for the post. In this case it may not be necessary to seek far.
8. Under the relevant rules, for the post of Assistant Engineer, degree in Electrical Engineering of Kerala University or other equivalent qualification recognized or equivalent thereto has been prescribed. For a higher post when a direct recruitment has to be held, the qualification that has to be obtained, obviously gives an ind ication that such qualification is definitely higher qualification than what is prescribed for the lower post, namely, the post of Sub-Engineer. In that view of the matter the qualification of degree in Electrical Engineering presupposes the acquisition of the lower qualification of diploma in that subject prescribed for the post, shall be considered to be sufficient for that post.
9. In the event the Government is of the view that only diploma holders should have applied to post of Sub-Engineers but not all those who possess higher qualifications, either this rule should have excluded in respect of candidates who possess higher qualifications or the position should have been made clear that degree holder shall not be eligible to apply for such post. When that position is not clear but on the other hand rules do not disqualify per se the holders of higher qualifications in the same faculty, it becomes clear that the rule could be understood in an appropriate manner as stated above. In that view of the matter the order of the High Court cannot be sustained. In this case we are not concerned with the question whether all those who possess such qualifications could have applied or not. When statutory rules have been published and Page 28 of 37 29 OA 1443/18 those rules are applicable, it presupposes that everyone concerned with such appointments will be aware of such rules or make himself aware of the rules before making appropriate applications. The High Court, therefore, is not justified in holding that recruitment of appellants would amount to fraud on the public.‖
(iii) Parvaiz Ahmad Parry vs. State of Jammu & Kashmir & others, CWP NO.13368/2015, decided on 6.11.2015, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that while the minimum qualification prescribed for the post of J&K Forest Service Range Officers Grade I (Forest) was a B.Sc. (Forestry or an equivalent degree from any University recognized by the ICAR, a candidate with a higher qualification was equally eligible. Thus, a B.Sc. candidate with Forestry as a major subject and M.Sc. in Forestry was eligible. It was observed:
―25. In our view, if a candidate has done B.Sc. in Forestry as one of the major subjects and has also done Masters in the Forestry, i.e., M.Sc. (Forestry) then in the absence of any clarification on such issue, the candidate possessing such higher qualification has to be held to possess the required qualification to apply for the post. In fact, acquiring higher qualification in the prescribed subject, i.e., Forestry was sufficient to hold that the appellant had possessed the prescribed qualification. It was coupled with the fact that Forestry was one of the appellant's major subjects in graduation, due to which he was able to do his Masters in Forestry.‖
(iv) Manjit Singh vs. State of Punjab & others, CWP No.451/2008, a Full Bench of the Hon'ble High Court of Punjab & Haryana has held that a candidate possessing a higher Page 29 of 37 30 OA 1443/18 degree in the same line cannot be denied consideration for selection, though he does not hold the lower qualification.
6. Per contra, Mr.H.K.Gangwani, learned counsel appearing for the respondents, has contended that the qualifications prescribed in the Recruitment Rules as well as in the employment notice cannot be in any manner whittled down and a different qualification cannot be adopted. The applicants not having admittedly possessed the qualification of 3-year Bachelor's Degree in Science (with Physics as one of the subject)/Computer Science/Information Technology/Computer Applications or 3-year Diploma in Electronics and Telecommunication Engineering from a recognized Institution/University or equivalent, as prescribed in the Recruitment Rules and in the employment notice, are ineligible to be considered for selection and recruitment to the post of Scientific Assistant. It has also been contended by Mr.H.K.Gangwani that in 2011 recruitment process, the respondent- Department had recruited 311 Scientific Assistants. In view of duties and responsibilities attached to the post of Scientific Assistant, four months integrated training was imparted to those appointees. This training was given to these appointees on full salary basis along with other admissible allowances. Out of 311 Scientific Assistants recruited in 2011, 80 Scientific Assistants having four year B.Tech degree have resigned from the respondent-Department. Apart from huge financial loss caused to the Government of India in the form of expenses incurred for imparting training, Page 30 of 37 31 OA 1443/18 a manpower shortage also aroused due to such resignation of Scientific Assistants holding 4-year B.Tech degree. Considering this aspect of the matter, and in view of clear stipulation in the Recruitment Rules and in the employment notice with regard to qualification required for the post of Scientific Assistant, the respondent-Department has issued the clarification dated 28.3.2018 that ―four year degree holders are not eligible for the post of Scientific Assistant‖, and the recruitment of any persons having 4-year B.Tech in Computer Science/Information Technology/Computer Applications/Electronics and Telecommunication Engineering in the year 2011 would not clothe the applicants with any right, much less an enforceable right, to claim that they are eligible for selection and appointment to the post of Scientific Assistant and to assail the clarification dated 28.3.2018. In support of his contentions, Mr.H.K.Gangwani has relied on the following decisions:
(1) Dr.M.S.Mudhol and another vs. S.D.Halegkar and others, (1993) 3 SCC 591, wherein the statutory recruitment rules prescribed the essential qualifications of (i) Master's degree with at least 2nd Division from a recognized university or equivalent; (ii) a degree in teaching from recognized university or equivalent; and (iii) experience of 10 years' teaching as a Vice Principal/P.G.T. in a Higher Secondary School or Inter-College. The recruitment rules also Page 31 of 37 32 OA 1443/18 stipulated that the condition with regard to the 2nd Division was relaxable in the case of candidates belonging to the same school and also in the case of SC and ST candidates. The desirable qualifications were: (i) experience in administrative charge of a recognized Higher Secondary School/Inter-College; (ii) Doctorate Degree; and (iii) M.Ed. degree from a recognized university. The 1st respondent possessed M.A. degree in Political Science with 3rd class with 41.1% aggregate marks and M.Ed. in second class. The Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the contention of the respondents that M.A with 2nd Division was equivalent to M.Ed. with second Division was fallacious.
The former was the academic qualification while the latter a professional qualification. The statutory rule with regard to the essential qualifications was very clear inasmuch as it required both academic Masters' degree and the teaching degree; the latter being not the substitute for the former. What is further, while laying down the qualifications with regard to the academic degree, viz., the Masters' degree, the rule insists upon 2nd Division for such degree. It does not insist upon a second division degree in teaching. A pass degree in teaching is sufficient in its eyes. It would, therefore, amount to distorting the requisite qualifications under the rules, to attempt to Page 32 of 37 33 OA 1443/18 substitute the teaching qualification for the academic qualification and exchanging the divisions of the two. It was, thus, concluded by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that the 1st respondent did not have the requisite educational qualifications to be selected for the post of Principal.
(2) Ashish Kumar vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and others, (2018) 3 SCC 55, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that any part of the advertisement which is contrary to the statutory rules has to give way to the statutory prescription, and that when there is variance in the advertisement and in the statutory rules, it is the statutory rules which take precedence. (3) Union of India and another vs. Internal Trading Co. and another, (2003) 5 SCC 437, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court, after considering the facts and circumstances of the case, has held that a party cannot claim that since something wrong has been done in another case, direction should be given for doing another wrong. It would not be setting a wrong right, but would be perpetuating another wrong. In such matters there is no discrimination involved. The concept of equal treatment on the logic of Article 14 of the Constitution cannot be pressed into service in such cases. What the concept of equal treatment presupposes is existence of similar legal foothold. It does not Page 33 of 37 34 OA 1443/18 countenance repetition of a wrong action to bring both wrongs on a par. Even if hypothetically it is accepted that a wrong has been committed in some other cases by introducing a concept of negative equality the respondents cannot strengthen their case. They have to establish strength of their cases on some other basis and not by claiming negative equality. (4) Vishal Properties (P)Ltd. vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and others, (2007) 11 SCC 172, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that the authorities might have acted in an irregular manner in case of some others, but that does not confer any legal right on the appellant to claim a similar benefit.
7. After having given our thoughtful consideration to the rival contentions, we have found considerable merit in the contentions of the applicants.
8. The Recruitment Rules and the employment notice dated 18.7.2017/notice dated 4.8.2017 issued by the respondent-SSC stipulated the minimum essential educational qualification of Bachelor's Degree in Science (with Physics as one of the subject)/Computer Science/Information Technology/Computer Applications or Diploma in Electronics and Telecommunication Engineering from a recognized Institution/University or equivalent. It was also stipulated that the qualifying degree or diploma should be in first class (60% marks) or 6.75 CGPA on a 10 point scale and Page 34 of 37 35 OA 1443/18 must be of 3 (three) years duration after 10+2 examination, and that the candidate must have passed 10+2 examination from a recognized Board or equivalent in Science with Physics and Mathematics as core subjects. It is not in dispute that the applicants possessed the qualification of 4-year B.Tech degree in Electronics & Communication Engineer/Computer Science Engineering /Information Technology/Electronics Engineering and 4-year B.Sc.Engineering in the relevant disciplines, with first class (60% marks) or 6.75 CGPA on a 10 point scale and passed 10+2 examination from a recognized Board or equivalent in Science with Physics and Mathematics as core subjects. Thus, the question that arises for our consideration is as to whether the applicants or any other candidates possessing 4-year B.Tech degree/4-year B.Sc. Engineering in the relevant disciplines are ineligible for selection and appointment to the post of Scientific Assistant in IMD. Similar question came up for consideration of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Jyoti K.K. and others vs. Kerala Public Service Commission (supra), wherein Their Lordships have held that if a person has acquired higher qualification in the same faculty, such qualification can certainly be stated to presuppose the acquisition of the lower qualification prescribed for any post. Similar view has also been taken by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Haryana vs. Abdul Gaffar Khan (supra) and in Parvaiz Ahmad Parry vs. State of Jammu & Kashmir & others (supra) and by a Full Bench of the Hon'ble High Court of Punjab & Haryana in Manjit Sigh vs. State of Page 35 of 37 36 OA 1443/18 Punjab & others (supra). Therefore, we have no hesitation in holding that the 4-year B.Tech/B.Sc. Engineering degree in the relevant disciplines possessed by the applicants is higher than the 3-year Bachelor's Degree in Computer Science/Information Technology/Computer Applications and 3- year Diploma in Electronics and Telecommunication Engineering, and that the applicants are eligible for selection and appointment to the post of Scientific Assistant. Furthermore, the Recruitment Rules neither specifically exclude the 4-year B.Tech/B.Sc. Engineering degree in the relevant disciplines as the minimum essential educational qualification for the post of Scientific Assistant, nor do the same stipulate that holders of 4-year B.Tech/B.Sc.Engineering degree in the relevant disciplines are ineligible for selection and appointment to the post of Scientific Assistant. The employment notice dated 18.7.2017/notice dated 4.8.2017 issued by the respondent-SSC also did not specifically stipulate that 4-year B.Tech/B.Sc.Engineering degree holders, like the applicants, would be ineligible for selection and appointment to the post of Scientific Assistant. Thus, the respondent-Department cannot be held to be justified in issuing the impugned clarification dated 28.3.2018 that ‗four year degree holders are not eligible for the post of Scientific Assistant', more so when the respondent- SSC had admittedly conducted the recruitment examination and declared the result of thereof, and had submitted the Merit Lists to the respondent- Department by 28.3.2018.
Page 36 of 37 37 OA 1443/18
9. The decisions relied on by Mr.H.K.Gangwani, learned counsel appearing for the respondents, besides being out of context, do not go to support the stand taken by the respondents.
10. In the light of our above discussions, we have no hesitation in holding that the impugned clarification dated 28.3.2018 (Annexure A/1) issued by the respondent-Department is unsustainable in the eyes of law and liable to be quashed. Accordingly, we quash the same and direct the respondent-Department to consider the candidatures of the applicants and other similarly placed candidates for selection and recruitment to the post of Scientific Assistant on the basis of their merit positions in the competitive examination held by the respondent-SSC pursuant to the Notice of Recruitment of Scientific Assistant in India Meteorological Department Examination, 2017.
11. Resultantly, the O.A. is allowed. No costs.
(PRAVEEN MAHAJAN) (RAJ VIR SHARMA)
ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
AN
Page 37 of 37