Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Kamlesh Kumar Meena vs South Delhi Municipal Corporation Of ... on 24 August, 2018
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
PRINCIPAL BENCH: NEW DELHI
O.A. No. 4240/2015
MA Nos. 3846/2015 and 3857/2015
Reserved on :20.08.2018
Pronounced on :24.08.2018
HON'BLE MR. V. AJAY KUMAR, MEMBER (J)
HON'BLE MR. A.K. BISHNOI, MEMBER (A)
1. Kamlesh Kumar Meena (ST),
S/o Shri Phool Chand Meena,
R/o Vill. & Post Daharia,
Distt. Karauli, Rajasthan,
Working at SDMC Primary School,
Lal Kuan-II (Central Zone).
2. Hans Raj Singh (OBC),
S/o Shri Ram Chander,
R/o A-1574 (FF), Green Fields Colony,
Sect. 42, Faridabad,
Haryana-121010.
3. Brahma Nand (SC),
S/o Shri Jai Pal,
R/o Village Ghamroj, Dist. Gurgaon,
Haryana
Working at SDMC Primary (Boys)
Dr. Ambedkar Sector-1, No.2.
4. Smt. Sushila Rawat (ST),
D/o Shri Babu Lal Rawat,
R/o B-34, Naraini Enclave,
Vill. Hastal, Uttam Nagar,
New Delhi
Working at SDMC Primary School
Hastal Vill.I-II (West Zone).
5. Smt. Pushpa Devi (OBC),
W/o Shri Jasbir Singh,
R/o DDA Janta Flats, Pul Prahladpur,
Surajkund Road, New Delhi-110004
Was appointed at SDMD Primary School
Meethapur Village-I
Now working as TGT (promoted on 2.4.2013)
2
OA 4240/2015
6. Smt. Vinita Sandil (ST),
W/o Shri Mahabir Munda,
R/o 14B/B, E-Block,
Phase-1, Qutub Vihar,
Goyala Dairy, New Delhi-71
Working at SMDC Primary School
Madhu Vihar, Phase-II,
Najafgarh Zone.
7. Devendra Kumar (SC),
S/o Shri Chandra Pal,
R/o H-59, Saurabh Vihar,
Harinagar Extension,
Jaitpur Road, Badarpur,
New Delhi
Initially posted at SDMC Primary School
Jaitpur-I, Girls-II.
8. Krishan Kumar,
S/o Shri Rishi Pal,
R/o 253, Devli Village,
New Delhi-110062
SDMC Pry. School C-Ist, Sangam Vihar,
New Delhi.
9. Mangi Lal,
S/o Shri Raj Mal Meena,
R/o C-2, Ashola Extension Part-II,
New Delhi-110074
SDMC Pry. School, Bhati Village,
New Delhi. .. Applicants
(By Advocate : Ms. Seema Sharma for Rama Shanker & Associates)
Versus
1. South Delhi Municipal Corporation,
Through its Commissioner,
At City Civic Centre,
Dr. S.P. Mukherjee Marg, New Delhi-110003.
2. The Director (Primary Education),
At Education Deptt., 23rd Floor,
Dr. S.P. Mukherjee Marg,
Civic Centre, Minto Road,
New Delhi-110003. .. Respondents
(By Advocate : Mrs. Anupama Bansal)
3
OA 4240/2015
ORDER
By Mr. V. Ajay Kumar, Member (J) MA No. 3846/2015 In the circumstances and for the reasons mentioned therein, the MA seeking condonation of delay in filing the OA is allowed. MA No.3857/2015
For the reasons stated therein, the MA for joining together in a single application is allowed.
OA No.4240/2015
It is submitted that, in pursuance of a Notification issued in the year 2002, the applicants applied for selection to the post of Assistant Teacher (MCD) (Post Code 013/2002). A common examination was held on 27.10.2002 for all categories, i.e. General, OBC, SC and ST. The results were declared and the applicants were also declared qualified in the said examination but their results were withheld and they have not been given appointments.
2. On enquiries, the applicants came to know that the persons who were declared selected and belong to the general category were given appointments but the applicants and others belonging to the reserved categories though selected, were not given appointment orders and their results were withheld. The reason for withholding the results of the candidates who were selected but belong to 4 OA 4240/2015 reserved category was that the applicants and others were not having valid caste certificates. The fathers of these persons were originally residents of different parts of the country and were first generation migrants to Delhi. The certificates issued to them and the castes of the applicants were not recognized as SC/ST/OBC in Delhi. Certain persons, who were identically placed like the applicants, i.e., belonging to the reserved categories though selected but were not issued appointment orders in respect of year 2001- 2002, filed CWP Nos. 5061/2011 and batch - Kunwar Pal and Others Vs. Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Another and a Learned Single Judge of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi, while disposing of the said Writ Petitions by a common judgment dated 31.05.2002 held as under:-
"In view of the aforesaid a writ of mandamus is issued to appoint such of the petitioners in the present writ petitions who are born and brought up in Delhi but the certificate issued to them is on the basis of the certificates issued to their fathers who were the migrants from other states.
The petitioners who are so appointed should also be entitled to the consequently benefits of seniority and pay scale though in view of the fact that they not been working for this period of time they shall not be entitled to the back wages for the said period of two months from today.
The writ petitions are disposed of in the aforesaid terms leaving the parties to bear their own costs".
3. The LPA No.625/2002 and batch in Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board and Another Vs. Kunwar Pal and Others filed against the aforesaid decision of the Learned Single Judge was also dismissed by a common order dated 13.05.2005. 5 OA 4240/2015
4. In pursuance of the aforesaid orders, the respondents finally appointed the applicants and other similarly situated persons during the year 2009.
5. The applicants filed the present OA seeking a direction to the respondents to grant them seniority in the post of Assistant Teacher as per their merit position in the selection with all consequential benefits.
6. Heard Ms. Seema Sharma for Ramashankar & Associates, learned counsel for the applicants and Mrs. Anupama Bansal, learned counsel for the respondents and perused the pleadings on record.
7. It is not in dispute that, if the applicants are identically placed like the petitioners in CWP No.5061/2001, i.e., Kunwar Pal and Others and batch, they are also entitled for the same benefit. In fact, the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi while allowing the Writ Petition of Kunwar Pal and Others while directing the respondents to appoint the petitioners therein, specifically declared that they are entitled for consequential benefits of seniority and pay scale though the back wages were denied. Though the respondents ought to have granted all the benefits conferred on Kunwar Pal and Others to all the similarly situated persons also, i.e., including seniority and other consequential benefits, they extended the said judgment to the extent of issuing appointment orders only but the consequential 6 OA 4240/2015 benefit of granting seniority was denied, unless they obtained orders again by approaching this Tribunal.
8. As a result, the applicants who are claiming to be identically placed like Kunwar Pal and Others were compelled to approach this Tribunal for the same benefits which were granted to the identically placed persons on the declaration of the principle of law. In Inder Pal Yadav Vs. Union of India, 1985 (3) SCR 837, the Hon'ble Apex Court held that those who do not come to the court need not be at a disadvantage to those who rushed to the Courts and if they are otherwise similarly situated, they are entitled to similar treatment, if not by anyone else at the hands of this court. In State of Karnataka and Others Vs. C. Lalitha, (2006) 2 SCC 747, it was held that service jurisprudence evolved by this Court from time to time postulates that all persons similarly situated should be treated similarly. Only because one person has approached the court that would not mean that persons similarly situated should be treated differently (also see K.I. Shephard Vs. Union of India, AIR 1988 SC 686; and K.T. Verappa and Others Vs. State of Karnataka and Others, 2006 (9) SCC 406).
9. In the circumstances and for the aforesaid reasons, the OA is allowed and the respondents are directed to consider the claims of all those persons including the applicants who were appointed belatedly in compliance of the decision in Kunwar Pal and Others 7 OA 4240/2015 (supra), and to grant notional seniority, fixation of pay as per their position in the merit list prepared by DSSSB in the relevant year, with all consequential benefits, except back wages, as admissible to their batchmates, belonging to the unreserved/general category candidates. This exercise shall be completed within 90 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.
(A.K. BISHNOI) (V. AJAY KUMAR)
Member (A) Member (J)
RKS