Punjab-Haryana High Court
Anupam Agarwal And Another vs Union Of India And Others on 15 January, 2014
Bench: Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Arun Palli
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CWP No.6740 of 2001(O & M)
Date of Decision:15.01.2014
Anupam Agarwal and another
....petitioners
Versus
Union of India and others
.....respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ARUN PALLI
Present: Mr. Subhash Ahuja, Advocate
for the petitioners
Mr.Rupinder Khosla, Assistant Solicitor General of India
for respondents No.1 to 3
***
SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, CHIEF JUSTICE (ORAL):
Counsel for the petitioners has brought to our notice the order passed by a Division Bench of Delhi High Court in CWP No.91 of 2000 titled as "Central Engineering Service Association and others vs. Union of India and others", decided on 10.04.2002.
A perusal of the order shows that the said writ petition was directed against the impugned order of Central Administrative Tribunal, which had opined to the following effect:
We, however, make it clear that it shall be open to the respondents to alter the ratio of the quota in exercise of powers of relaxation under the 1954 rules, which were in force till 28th October, 1996, in accordance with those rules. They shall also have the power to regularise the services of the AEs promoted on ad hoc basis in excess of their quota if no person belonging to the AEEs quota was available at the relevant time or is not Verma Neenu 2014.01.17 10:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CWP No.6740 of 2001 -2- available even now. There shall, however, be a condition that if subsequently such a candidate become available and is actually promoted, inter se seniority shall be fixed by appropriately pushing down the person who has been promoted in excess of the quota."
It is stated before us that the case of the petitioners is identical to the AEEs, referred to aforesaid. The order of the Division Bench further goes on to the record that in furtherance of these observations, the relaxation in Central Engineering Service Class-I Recruitment Rules, 1954, had been granted.
It is, thus, agreed that the present petition be disposed of in terms of the aforesaid direction with liberty to seek any clarification, if so required, on account of any subsequent orders passed by the competent courts.
Ordered accordingly.
(SANJAY KISHAN KAUL) CHIEF JUSTICE 15.01.2014 neenu (ARUN PALLI) JUDGE Verma Neenu 2014.01.17 10:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh