Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Shri Rishipal Rana S/O Shri Jogi Ram Rana vs Municipal Corporation Of Delhi on 28 January, 2010
Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench, New Delhi O.A.No.2463/2009 Thursday, this the 28th day of January 2010 Honble Shri Shanker Raju, Member (J) Honble Dr. Veena Chhotray, Member (A) 1. Shri Rishipal Rana s/o Shri Jogi Ram Rana r/o Vill & PO Qutab Garh, Delhi-39 2. Dr. Rita Sharma d/o Shri S S Mudgal 212, Village Munirka, New Delhi 67 3. Shri Kripal Singh Baghel s/o Shri Kanauji Lal Baghel r/o 65, Pocket A, Sector 13 Dwarka, New Delhi-78 4. Ms. Sangita Jain w/o Shri R K Jain r/o 3473/1, Narang Colony Tri Nagar, Delhi-35 5. Shri Ahok Kumar Sharma s/o Shri Ram Singh Sharma r/o 9/5866, Gandhi Nagar, Delhi-31 6. Ms. Dolly Kaur d/o Shri Sant Singh 1/9753, West Gorakh Park, Shahdara, Delhi-32 7. Shri Jagdish Chandra Joshi s/o Shri H C Joshi 100 Neemri Colony, New Delhi-52 8. Shri Rajeev Kumar s/o Shri Devi Dayal Maurya r/o E-17/F-3, Dilshad Colony, Delhi-95 9. Shri Ambuj Kumar s/o Shri Ram Krishna r/o A-10/5A, DLF Ankur Vihar Loni, Ghaziabad 10. Shri Anil Kumar s/o late Rattan Singh r/o B-36/D-I Mangalam Shalimar Garden Extn. Part II Ghaziabad, presently at Delhi ..Applicants (By Advocate: Shri Ajesh Luthra) Versus 1. Municipal Corporation of Delhi through its Commissioner Town Hall, Delhi 2. Director (Personnel) Municipal Corporation of Delhi, Town Hall, Delhi ..Respondents (By Advocate: Shri Piyush Gaur for Shri Arun Bhardwaj) O R D E R (ORAL)
Shri Shanker Raju:
Applicants, who are feeder category candidates to the post of Assistant Education Officer (General), have assailed the inaction of the respondents by which DOPT Office Memoranda dated 25.5.1998 and 24.3.2009, which stipulated revision of pay scale and reduction of length of service from 10 years to 6 years, has not been adhered to.
2. Another grievance of the applicant is that whereas the statutory recruitment rules prescribe 50% by promotion failing which by direct recruitment and remaining 50% by direct recruitment, yet it has been encroaching upon the quota meant for direct recruitment. It is in this regard stated that during the pendency of this OA, direct recruitment has taken place whereby respondents have appointed 8 direct recruitees and 2 vacancies have already been upgraded to the next promotional post. It is stated that keeping in light the cadre strength of 14, there are 8 direct recruitment candidates functioning, which is in derogation of the quota assigned under direct recruitment.
3. Learned counsel would also contend in the rejoinder that one Smt. Kanta Rani is likely to be appointed to the next higher grade. As such, balance should be made by not following the said quota.
4. It is further stated that in order to facilitate and to give effect to right of consideration for promotion, which is a fundamental right of the applicant, respondents should not only amend the recruitment rules as per the Govt. of Indias instructions but also to fill up the vacancies for promotion quota on year-wise basis, so that the seniority of the applicants are protected and their right to be considered on fair and equitable basis is protected.
5. On the other hand, learned proxy counsel for respondents vehemently opposed the contentions and stated that the respondents are in the process of amending the recruitment rules in connection with new guidelines by 6th CPC recommendations. It is also stated that total number of sanctioned posts of Assistant Education Officer (General) is 16 but on upgradation it has come done to 14. It is denied that the quota has been exceeded to.
6. Learned proxy counsel also stated that the recruitment rules are being amended as per the procedural requirement and a circular has been issued in this regard to various departments of MCD.
7. We have carefully considered the rival contentions of the parties and perused the records.
8. Being an administrative authority, respondents are bound by the statutory rules, which stipulate in case of Assistant Education Officer (General) that vacancies are to be filled in a proportion of 50% as direct recruit and remaining 50% on promotion. As the respondents are duty bound to amend the recruitment rules for which the process has been started by reducing the length of service as an eligibility, the same should be done expeditiously within a reasonable time.
9. Insofar as the direct recruitees encroaching upon the quota meant for promotees is concerned, it is stated that one Smt. Kanta Rani is likely to be promoted in the next grade. Respondents shall abide by the percentage of direct recruitee and promotee in future.
10. We dispose of this OA with a direction to the respondents to complete the process of amending the recruitment rules as per Govt. of Indias instructions, as suggested by 6th CPC, within a period of period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is also made clear that in future the recruitment rules and the quota prescribed both for direct recruit and promotee shall be meticulously adhered to and should not be encroached upon inter-se by any of the categories. It goes without saying that after the recruitment rules are amended, the claim of the applicant on holding the year-wise vacancies shall be considered for promotion as per law on the subject. No costs.
( Dr. Veena Chhotray ) ( Shanker Raju ) Member (A) Member (J) /sunil/