Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi

Dr Chandra Shekhar vs M/O Health And Family Welfare on 4 November, 2020

                              1                         OA No. 1235/2020



                   Central Administrative Tribunal
                     Principal Bench, New Delhi

                         O.A. No.1235/2020

                 This the 04thday of November, 2020

                     (Through Video Conferencing)

          Hon'ble Mr. Justice L. Narasimha Reddy, Chairman
                Hon'ble Ms. Aradhana Johri, Member (A)

     Dr. Chandra Shekar, age about 45 years,
     S/o Shri Gulab Nath,
     R/o H. No. C4E, 124, Janak Puri,
     New Delhi - 110058.
                                                     ...Applicant

    (By Advocate: Mr. Gaya Prasad)

                              VERSUS

     1.   1. Union of India through,
          Secretary,
          Health & Family Welfare,
          Nirman Bhawan, New Delhi.

     2. Secretary,
        Medical Council of India,
        Dada Dev Mandir Road, Dwarka, Phase - I,
        Pocket -14, Sector - 8, Dwarka phase -I,
        Pocket - 14, Sector-8, Dwarka,
        New Delhi - 110024.

     3. Secretary,
        Union Public Service Commission,
        Dhaulpur House, Shahjahan Road,
        New Delhi.

                                                ...Respondents

     (By Advocate: Mr. Manish Kumar for respondent No. 1, Mr.
T. Singhdev for respondent No. 2 and Mr. R. V. Sinha with Mr.
Amit Sinha for respondent No. 3)
                           2                           OA No. 1235/2020




                       ORDER (Oral)

Justice L. Narasimha Reddy, Chairman:-

The respondents issued a notification proposing to fill various posts, including the post of Assistant professor in the Central Health Service through advertisement No. 07/2020. The maximum age limit is stipulated as 40 years. The applicant crossed that age. He filed this OA with a prayer to declare the action of the respondents in debarring his candidature by not increasing the upper age limit from 40 to 45 years. He placed reliance upon the order passed by the Hon'ble Madras High Court and the steps taken by the Medical Council of India in relation to the post of Senior Resident. According to the applicant, the respondents have increased the maximum age limit for the post of Senior Resident from 40 to 45 years and though the post of Assistant Professor occurs just above that,no steps were taken for enhancing the age limit upto 45 years.

2. The Medical Council of India filed a counter affidavit opposing the OA. It is stated that the age limit for various teaching posts in the Government and private establishments are stipulated by them and in the context of Assistant Professor the age limit is 40 years only. They 3 OA No. 1235/2020 also maintained a distinction between the post of Assistant Professor, on the one hand and Senior Resident on the other hand.

3. We heard Sh. Gaya Prasad, learned counsel for the applicant and Sh.Manish Kumar and Sh.T. Singhdev for respondent No. 2 and Sh. R. V. Sinha with Sh. Amit Sinha for respondent No. 3 learned counsel for the respondents.

4. The only controversy in this OA is about the maximum age limit for the post of Assistant Professor. The age limit as well as the qualifications are stipulated under the recruitment rules for the post in the Central Health Service. The applicant does not dispute that as of now the rules stipulate the age limit of 40 years. The UPSC has simply reproduced the requirements under the relevant rules in their advertisement and they are not stipulated any new conditions.

5. It may be true that for the post of Senior Resident, litigation ensued and on the basis of the decisions issued by the Medical Council of India, the age limit was enhanced from 40 to 45 years. However, we find it difficult to apply the same for the post of Assistant Professor. Here itself it needs to be mentioned that while Assistant Professor is a full fledged teaching post and the incumbent appointed would be entitled to be in service till 4 OA No. 1235/2020 he attains the age of superannuation, the post of Senior Resident is a different one altogether. The selected candidate would function in the designated hospital for a limited period and the training/experience which he gets for that period would enable him to be considered for appointment to the post of Assistant Professor. Beyond that, it is neither a teaching post nor a regular one.

6. Therefore, we do not find any merit in the OA and the same is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.





(Aradhana Johri)             (Justice L. Narasimha Reddy)
Member (A)                                  Chairman

/pj/ankit/sd/akshaya27nov/