Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Sh. Rakesh Kumar Yadav vs The Govt. Of Ncd on 22 December, 2009
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH OA No. 648/2009 MA NO. 428/2009 New Delhi, this the 22nd day of December, 2009 HONBLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.BALI, CHAIRMAN HONBLE MR. L.K.JOSHI, VICE CHAIRMAN (A) 1. Sh. Rakesh Kumar Yadav, s/o Sh. Sri Ram Yadav, R/o H.No.548, Surakh Pur Road, Gopal Nagar, Phase-II Najafgarh, New Delhi-110043. 2. Sh. Sandeep Sharma s/o Late Sh. Bhola Dutt Sharma R/o C-4/185, Yamuna Vihar, Delhi-110053. Applicant (By Advocate: Shri Sachin Chauhan) Versus 1. The Govt. of NCD Through its Secretary, Department of Health & Family Welfare Secretariat, Players Building, Indraprastha Estate, New Delhi. 2. The Additional Secretary (Health) Health & Family Welfare Department, Technical Cell, Level 9, Wing A, Delhi Secretariat, Players Building, Indraprastha Estate, New Delhi. 3. The Medical Superintendent, Rao Tula Ram Memorial Hospital Jaffar Pur, New Delhi-110073. 4. The Medical Superintendent, Dr. Hedgewar Arogya Sansthan, Karkardooma, Delhi. 5. Union of India Through the Secretary, Ministry of Finance, North Block, New Delhi. Respondents (By Advocate: Sh. Chandramani Bhardwaj for Ms. Rashmi Chopra) ORDER
Mr. L.K.Joshi, Vice Chairman (A) The Applicants are Operation Theatre (Technicians) (OT Technicians hereafter). The first Applicant was selected to the aforesaid post on 1.04.2003 and possesses the qualification of B.Sc. with Science which degree he acquired in 2007. The second Applicant was selected to the aforesaid post on 2.09.2003 and possesses a Degree of M.Sc. in Computer Science, which he acquired in 2005. The Applicants were selected on the basis of an advertisement which was issued in the Employment News on 18.02.2002. The pay scale mentioned for the post of OT Technicians in the aforesaid advertisement was Rs.5000-8000. The qualifications which were prescribed were as follows:-
(1) Matriculation/ Higher Secondary/ Senior Secondary (10+2 with Science) from a recognized Institution/ Board.
(2) Operation Room Assistant Course from recognized Institution.
(3) 5 years experience as Operation Theatre Assistant course from recognized institution.
2. The Applicants are aggrieved that subsequently the pay scales of the OT Technician have been rolled back from Rs.5000-8000 to Rs.4000-6000.
3. When we heard the arguments in this case, the learned counsel for the Applicant stated that the issue was squarely covered by a judgment of the learned Full Bench of this Tribunal in OA No.1167/2006 which was decided on 7.01.2009.
4. The issue before the Full Bench in the aforesaid OA No.1167/2006 was whether the OT Technicians with qualifications of matriculation/higher secondary/senior secondary (10+2 with Science) with 10 years experience in Operation Theatre would also be eligible to the scale of Rs.5000-8000, which was given to the OT Technicians with qualification of B.Sc. + Diploma as per the recommendations of the 5th Central Pay Commission. In this OA the learned Full Bench decided the issue as follows:-
17. On the basis of above discussion, the pay scale of OT (Technician) as per the recommendations of V CPC in paragraph 52.78 read with Serial Number XVII (a) of Part `B of the recommendations would be Rs.5000-150-8000/- irrespective of qualifications of B.Sc. plus Diploma/ Certificate or Matriculation/ Higher Secondary/ Senior Secondary (10+2) with Science with 10 years experience in Operation Theatre. The contrary view of the learned Bench in OA 2184/2005 is overruled. The OA is remitted to the Division Bench for decision on merit.
5. However, in the instant OA, the Applicants possess the degrees of B.Sc. and M.Sc. respectively, but they do not possess the prescribed diploma as prescribed in the 5th Central Pay Commission. Moreover, the recruitment has been made on the basis of qualifications, which we have quoted above. The Applicants case is not that they possess the qualifications prescribed at serial numbers 2 and 3 as quoted in the preceding paragraph 1 of this order. Also, while they have the degrees of B.Sc. and M.Sc. respectively, they do not have the diploma, as required. The issue, therefore, does not seem to be the same as in OA No.1167/2006, which was decided by the Full Bench on January 2009.
6. This has not been argued by the learned counsel for the Applicant, whereas the learned counsel for the Respondents in the written arguments submitted by her has stated, inter alia, that the Applicants do not have the requisite qualification.
7. In view of the above, further information needs to be elicited and the matter would have to be re-heard. List it for hearing on ____.
( L.K. JOSHI ) ( V.K. BALI ) Vice Chairman (A) Chairman sd