Central Administrative Tribunal - Bangalore
Radhe Shyam Yadaw vs Isro on 25 February, 2025
1
O.A.Nos.170/631/23 & 170/12
2024/CAT/BANGALORE
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
BANGALORE BENCH, BENGALURU
ORIGINAL APPLICATION NOs.170/00631/2023
& 170/00012/2024
Order Reserved on: 20.2.2025
Date of Order: 25.02.2025
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE B.K SHRIVASTAVA, MEMBER (J)
HON'BLE DR. SANJIV KUMAR, MEMBER (A)
O.A No.170/631/2023:
Pravash Kumar, S/o Sri. Baidya Nath Arun, Aged 55 years,
working as Junior Translation Officer,
Laboratory for Electro-Optics Systems,
Indian Space Research Organisation, (LEOS-ISRO),
1st Cross, Peenya, Bengaluru-560 058,
Residing at Flat No.1, Emerald Enclave,
Block-A, Phase-1, 5th Cross, Cauvery Layout,
Kereguddadahalli, Bengaluru-560 090. ...Applicant
(By Advocate Shri.A.R.Holla)
Vs.
1. Union of India, By Secretary,
Department of Space, ISRO Head Quarters,
Anthariksh Bhavan, New BEL Road, Bengaluru-560 017.
2. The Head, P&GA, PPEG, LEOS-ISRO Indian Space Research Organisation,
Antariksh Bhavan, New BEL Road, Bengaluru-560 094.
3. The Joint Secretary, DOS/Member (Pers),
ISRO Council, Indian Space Research Organization,
SHAINESHAINEY VIJU
CAT Bangalore
Y VIJU 2025.02.25
16:30:34+05'30'
2
O.A.Nos.170/631/23 & 170/12
2024/CAT/BANGALORE
Antariksh Bhavan, New BEL Road, Bengaluru-560 094.
4. The Senior Administrative Officer, U.R.Rao Satellite Centre,
ISRO, Antariksh Bhavan, New BEL Road,
Bengaluru-560 094. ......Respondents
(By Advocate Shri.K.Gajendra Vasu for R1 to 4)
O.A No. 170/12/2024:
Radhe Shyam Yadaw
S/o Sri. Harihar Yadaw, Aged 54 years,
working as Junior Translation Officer,
Regional Remote Sensing Centre - South,
ISITE Campus, Indian Space Research Organisation,
Outer Ring Road, Karthiknagar, Marathahalli,
Bengaluru-560 037, Residing at No.3C-604,
ISRO Housing Colony, Jalahalli,
Bengaluru-560 013. ...Applicant
(By Advocate Shri.A.R.Holla)
Vs.
1. Union of India, By the Secretary,Department of Space,
ISRO Head Quarters, Anthariksh Bhavan, New BEL Road, Bengaluru-560 094.
2. The Senior Head, P & GA, ISRO Hqs Indian Space Research Organization,
Antariksh Bhavan, New BEL Road, Bengaluru-560 094.
3. The Joint Secretary, DOS/Member (Pers), ISRO Council, Indian Space
Research Organization, Antariksh Bhavan, New BEL Road,
Bengaluru-560 094.
4. The Senior Administrative Officer,
Indian Space Research Organisation, Antariksh Bhavan,
New BEL Road, Bengaluru-560 094. ......Respondents
(By Advocate Shri.Vishnu Bhat for R 1 to 4)
SHAINESHAINEY VIJU
CAT Bangalore
Y VIJU 2025.02.25
16:30:34+05'30'
3
O.A.Nos.170/631/23 & 170/12
2024/CAT/BANGALORE
ORDER
PER: DR. SANJIV KUMAR, MEMBER (A)
These two Original Applications have been filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act 1985 and have similar facts and law points to be decided. Hence they are taken together for disposal. For clarity and convenience, we are taking the facts of the applicant in O.A 631/2023 as the main case for consideration in detail.
2. The reliefs claimed by the applicants in both the O.As are as under:
O.A 631/2023:
(a) To quash the Order No. HQ @: ADMN: A.20(2) dated 04.08.2014, issued by the respondent No.4, Annexure-A3, to the extent it states that "personnel existing on rolls in the cadre as on date of issue of the order will be eligible for consideration for promotion to the post of Hindi Officer on completion of seven years combined service as Jr. Hindi Translator or Sr. Hindi Translator or both and the same shall not be applicable for future recruits",
(b) Quash the Order No.020/1(2.1)/.REV-21 dated 11.08.2021, issued by the respondent No.4, Annexure-A5 and
(c) Grant such other relief deemed fit, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case.
SHAINESHAINEY VIJU CAT Bangalore Y VIJU 2025.02.25 16:30:34+05'30' 4 O.A.Nos.170/631/23 & 170/12 2024/CAT/BANGALORE O.A 12/2024:
(a) To quash the Order No. HQ @: ADMN: A.20(2) dated 04.08.2014, issued by the respondent No.3, Annexure-A3, to the extent it states that "personnel existing on rolls in the cadre as on date of issue of the order will be eligible for consideration for promotion to the post of Hindi Officer on completion of seven years combined service as Jr. Hindi Translator or Sr. Hindi Translator or both and the same shall not be applicable for future recruits",
(b) To quash the Order No.HQ:ADMN:A.20(2):2023 dated 17.01.2023, issued by the respondent No.4, Annexure-A10 and
(c) To direct the respondents to implement the Office Memorandum No.HQ:ADMN A.20 (2) dated 15.02.2006, issued by the respondent No.4, Annexure-Al, for filling up of the post of Asst. Director (OL)/Hindi Officer and
(d) Grant such other relief deemed fit, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case."
3. The reliefs are claimed on the grounds and legal provisions as mentioned in paragraphs 5(i) to 5(iii) of the Original Application. The brief facts as narrated by the applicant are that he joined the Laboratory for Electro-Optics Systems, Indian Space Research Organization as a Junior Hindi Translator on 02.09.2014 and in O.A 12/2024, the applicant joined on 25.08.2014.
4. The norms for consideration for recruitment of Hindi Officer [now re-designated as Assistant Director (OL)] in ISRO has been revised vide O.M. dated 15.02.2006. The feeder cadre for promotion SHAINESHAINEY VIJU CAT Bangalore Y VIJU 2025.02.25 16:30:34+05'30' 5 O.A.Nos.170/631/23 & 170/12 2024/CAT/BANGALORE to the post of Hindi Officer is Junior Hindi Translator and Senior Hindi Translator. The minimum residency period required is 7 years combined service in the grades of Sr. Hindi Translator & Junior Hindi Translator or 7 years of service in the grade of Junior Hindi Translator.
5. The Department of Personnel and Training issued O.M dated 19.09.2013 containing model Recruitment Rules for the posts of Junior Hindi Translators, Senior Hindi Translators, Assistant Directors etc. with a direction to the Ministries/Departments to review the existing rules in conformity with the Model Recruitment Rules. In pursuance of the same, the norms for recruitment and promotion of Hindi Staff (other than Hindi typists) have been revised in terms of O.M. dated 04.08.2014.
6. In the said O.M. it is stated that "personnel existing on rolls in the cadre as on date of issue of the order will be eligible for consideration for promotion to the post of Hindi Officer on completion of seven years combined service as Jr. Hindi Translator or Sr. Hindi Translator or both and the same shall not be applicable for future recruits".
SHAINESHAINEY VIJU CAT Bangalore Y VIJU 2025.02.25 16:30:34+05'30' 6 O.A.Nos.170/631/23 & 170/12 2024/CAT/BANGALORE
7. As per the revised norms, those personnel who have joined on or after the date of issue of O.M. dated 04.08.2014 are not eligible for consideration for promotion to the grade of Hindi Officer, since three years' service as Senior Hindi Translator is mandatory. Hence the applicants have approached this Tribunal praying for the aforementioned reliefs.
8. On notice, the respondents have filed their reply statements in both the O.As and objection to M.A 500/2023 for condonation of delay in O.A 631/2023. Thereafter, no rejoinder has been filed by the applicants.
9. The case came up for final hearing on 20.2.2025. Shri.A.R.Holla for the applicants, Shri.K.Gajendra Vasu for respondents 1 to 4 in O.A 170/631/2023 and Shri.Vishnu Bhat for respondents 1 to 4 in O.A 170/12/2024 were present and heard.
10. We have carefully gone through the entire records and considered the rival contentions.
11. M.A 500/2023 has been filed in O.A 631/2023 for condoning the delay of 456 days in filing the O.A. SHAINESHAINEY VIJU CAT Bangalore Y VIJU 2025.02.25 16:30:34+05'30' 7 O.A.Nos.170/631/23 & 170/12 2024/CAT/BANGALORE
12. The contention of the applicant in M.A 500/2023 is that in pursuance of the Model Recruitment Rules, the norms for recruitment of Hindi Officers have been changed vide O.M dated 4.8.2014, affecting the promotional chances of the applicant and other translators. The applicant submitted a representation on 29.12.2020 seeking remedy for his grievance which was disposed of by an order dated 11.8.2021 stating that the department was advised to maintain Status-Quo. The cause of action arose for filing this O.A. was on 11.8.2021 and the O.A. was required to be filed before 11.8.2022. Hence, as per the applicant, there are 456 days of delay and he had submitted his further representations on 17.1.2022 and 18.2.2022, which were not replied.
13. In the objection filed by the respondents to M.A 500/2023, they have mentioned that in the matter of condonation of delay in filing appeals beyond the limitation period, the courts are empowered to condone the delay, provided the litigant can demonstrate that there was the sufficient cause in preferring appeal beyond the limitation period and that generally delays in preferring appeals are required to be condoned in the interest of justice, where no gross negligence or SHAINESHAINEY VIJU CAT Bangalore Y VIJU 2025.02.25 16:30:34+05'30' 8 O.A.Nos.170/631/23 & 170/12 2024/CAT/BANGALORE deliberate inaction or lack of bonafides is imputable to the party seeking condonation of the delay.
14. It is noted that no clear ground has been made out by the applicant to condone the delay. Reason for delay is not explained in this case at all. On further perusal it is seen that the applicant has challenged the order (O.M) dated 4.8.2014 in both the cases and it is not explained how their period of delay should not be reckoned from that date. No reasons are forthcoming to explain the delay from 4.8.2014. There is no cogent reason placed before us in Miscellaneous Application 500/2023 and in the attached affidavit for allowing the said M.A, hence the Miscellaneous Application is to be rejected and the delay in filing the Original Application cannot be condoned. The applicant cannot challenge an O.M dated 4.8.2014 which preceded his date of appointment 2.9.2014 without giving justifiable reasons. And when he has failed to give any reason, whatsoever to condone such long delay, there is no ground to condone the delay. However we are inclined to examine the case of the applicant on merit also in succeeding paragraphs.
15. Let us examine the grounds made out in paragraph 5 of the O.A., one by one.
SHAINESHAINEY VIJU CAT Bangalore Y VIJU 2025.02.25 16:30:34+05'30' 9 O.A.Nos.170/631/23 & 170/12 2024/CAT/BANGALORE
16. In paragraph 5(i), the applicant submits that he has completed 9 years of service as a Junior Hindi Translator (now designated as Junior Translation Officer) and has not been considered for promotion to the post of Hindi Officer/Assistant Director (OL) in view of the revised norms as per Annexure A3, which are in vogue since 4.8.2014. The applicant says that he will have no avenue for promotion till his retirement, as per the revised norms. His request to consider him for promotion has been answered as DOS has decided to maintain 'Status Quo' till further orders.
These are matters of fact and no clear ground has been made out, either on any law point or rule which goes in favour of the applicant in any way.
17. In paragraph 5(ii), the applicant says that the impugned order, Annexure A3 has been brought into force with effect from 4.8.2014 in tune with the Model Recruitment Rules notified on 19.9.2013, which has resulted in an anomalous situation depriving the promotional avenues to the applicant and similarly situated employees.
SHAINESHAINEY VIJU CAT Bangalore Y VIJU 2025.02.25 16:30:34+05'30' 10 O.A.Nos.170/631/23 & 170/12 2024/CAT/BANGALORE Here again, there is no clear indication of grounds which have been made out by the applicant to distinguish his case. Hence it does not strengthen in any way the case of the applicant.
18. In paragraph 5(iii), the applicant says that it is just and necessary to delete the words "personnel existing on rolls in the cadre as on date of issue of the order will be eligible for consideration for promotion to the post of Hindi Officer on completion of seven years combined service as Jr.Hindi Translator or Sr.Hindi Translator or both and the same shall not be applicable for future recruits" appearing in the order at Annexure A3 and consider the Junior and Senior Translation Officers for promotion, till the Model Recruitment Rules of 2013 are amended suitably to provide promotional avenues in the cadre of Junior and Senior Translation Officers appropriately.
Again, there is no clarity as to what the applicant wants to say as grounds. Mere deletion of the referred clause will not help the applicant, but only affect the employees who existed in the cadre before the said date of 4.8.2014.
19. At the time of argument, the applicants' counsel mentioned that the new Model Recruitment Rules which came into effect from 4.8.2014 are discriminatory as they make the employees recruited SHAINESHAINEY VIJU CAT Bangalore Y VIJU 2025.02.25 16:30:34+05'30' 11 O.A.Nos.170/631/23 & 170/12 2024/CAT/BANGALORE before the date of the said notification on 4.8.2014 have one law and those who are recruited after the same have another law, particularly, referring to the Asterisk * footnote at item 3, which reads as follows:
Sl.No. Post and Pay Band with Proposed Model RR Grade Pay 3 Hindi Officer 3 years service as Senior Hindi Rs.15600-39100 with Translator * GP Rs.5400 (PB-3) * Personnel existing on rolls in the cadre as on date of issue of the order will be eligible for consideration for promotion to the post of Hindi Officer on completion of seven years combined service as Jr.Hindi Translator or Sr.Hindi Translator or both and the same shall not be applicable for future recruits.
20. A simple reading of the above shows that the proposed recruitment rules for getting promotion as Hindi Officers in the pay band of Rs.15600-39100 with Grade Pay of Rs.5400 in PB-3 was three years' service as Senior Hindi Translator, but it is mentioned that the personnel existing on rolls in the cadre as on date of issue of the said order will be eligible for consideration for promotion to the post of Hindi Officer on completion of seven years combined service as Jr.Hindi Translator or Sr.Hindi Translator or both and the same shall not be applicable for future recruits.
SHAINESHAINEY VIJU CAT Bangalore Y VIJU 2025.02.25 16:30:34+05'30' 12 O.A.Nos.170/631/23 & 170/12 2024/CAT/BANGALORE
21. Now the question is whether the rules can make such distinctions between two class of employees of the same cadre?
22. The respondents vehemently stated in their reply statement at paragraph 11 that there is no anomaly as the Office Memorandum dated 4.8.2014 has clear norms and required exemptions to protect the interests of the staff on rolls and so they have no distinction between those staff who are already there in the rolls earlier than the said notification and the change of rule applied to only to the future recruits.
23. From the record, it is evident that as per O.M dated 15.2.2006 at Annexure A-1 with the subject "Revision of norms for consideration to the post of Hindi Officer (Rs.7500-250-12000) - regarding" reads that:
"Revised cadre structure and scales of pay for promotion to the post of Hindi Officer was issued vide DOS OM No.2/3(2)/2003-I dated 7.11.2003. With immediate effect and until further orders, the norms for consideration to the post of Hindi Officer is revised as follows:
Promotion from the Promotion to the post Minimum residency post of of period required Sr.Hindi Translator Hindi Officer 7 years combined Jr.Hindi Translator service in the grades of Senior Hindi SHAINESHAINEY VIJU CAT Bangalore Y VIJU 2025.02.25 16:30:34+05'30' 13 O.A.Nos.170/631/23 & 170/12 2024/CAT/BANGALORE (Rs.7599-250- Translator (Rs.6500-
200-10500) & Junior
12000) Hindi Translator
(Rs.5500-175-9000)
OR
7 years service in the
grade of Junior Hindi
Translator (Rs.5500-
175-9000)
2. The above-revised norms shall be followed for the reviews to be held after the issue of this Office Memorandum.
Hindi version will follow."
24. A simple reading of the same shows that for Senior Hindi Translators and Junior Hindi Translators, to get promotion to the post of Hindi Officer, 7 years combined service in the grades of Senior Hindi Translator (Rs.6500-200-10500) & Junior Hindi Translator or 7 years' service in the grade of Junior Hindi Translator was sufficient. That means, there was no distinction between how much time was spent as a Junior/Senior Hindi Translator. Whereas in due course, based on the DoP&T O.M dated 19.9.2013 which circulated Model Recruitment Rules for the various posts in the Official language Cadre for Subordinate Offices, specifically distinction was made between Junior Hindi Translator and Senior Hindi Translator and it became a promotional post. And accordingly, the Hindi Officer post was also a SHAINESHAINEY VIJU CAT Bangalore Y VIJU 2025.02.25 16:30:34+05'30' 14 O.A.Nos.170/631/23 & 170/12 2024/CAT/BANGALORE promotion post of the Senior Hindi Translator and the rules through O.M dated 4.8.2014 with the subject "Model Recruitment rules for the various posts in Official Language cadre in DOS/ISRO - regarding" was notified with the following details:
"2. After taking all relevant factors into account, it has been decided to adopt, the model Recruitment Rules notified by the Ministry of Personnel PG & Pensions, Department of Personnel Training vide OM dated 19.9.2013, for the Official language personnel in DOS/ISRO. Accordingly, with immediate effect, the norms for recruitment and promotion of Hindi Staff, other than Hindi Typist in DOS/ISRO are revised as under:-
Sl.No. Post and Pay Band with Proposed Model RR Grade Pay
1. Jr.Hindi Translator The educational qualification for Rs.9300-34800 with direct recruitment to the post of GP Rs.4200 (PB-2) Jr.Hindi Translator is furnished in Annexure
2. Sr.Hindi Translator 5 years residency as Jr.Hindi Rs.9300-34800 with Translator GP Rs.4600 (PB-2) 3 Hindi Officer 3 years service as Senior Hindi Rs.15600-39100 with Translator * GP Rs.5400 (PB-3) * Personnel existing on rolls in the cadre as on date of issue of the order will be eligible for consideration for promotion to the post of Hindi Officer on completion of seven years combined service as Jr.Hindi Translator or Sr.Hindi Translator or both and the same shall not be applicable for future recruits.
"
SHAINESHAINEY VIJU CAT Bangalore Y VIJU 2025.02.25 16:30:34+05'30' 15 O.A.Nos.170/631/23 & 170/12 2024/CAT/BANGALORE
25. At the time of argument, the applicants further brought a contention that in their Organisation, the cadre of Sr.Hindi Translator, Junior Hindi Translators and Hindi Officers are unit-wise and in the unit where they are working, actually, there is no Senior Hindi Translator post and no one is working there as such, but there is a post of Hindi Officer. So the applicants will never be eligible to get a promotion to the Hindi Officer post as the intermediate position is not available there.
26. From the facts of the case, it is evident that the respondent organisation was notifying the rules merely as an O.M which is evident from the existing rules (O.M dated 15.02.2006) which is relied on by the applicant, which in due course was substituted by the O.M dated 4.8.2014 which changed the eligibility for promotion to the cadre of Hindi Officer which was earlier open from both Senior Hindi Translators and Junior Hindi Translators who had completed 7 years of combined service or individual service. But by the new rule dated 4.8.2014 (O.M) only the Senior Hindi Translators with 3 years of service were eligible to be promoted to Hindi Officer but for those staff who had been there in the organisation earlier than 4.8.2014, the SHAINESHAINEY VIJU CAT Bangalore Y VIJU 2025.02.25 16:30:34+05'30' 16 O.A.Nos.170/631/23 & 170/12 2024/CAT/BANGALORE old rules were applicable and the new rules were only prospectively applicable to new entrants.
27. We have verified the date of recruitment of the applicants which are 2.9.2014 in O.A 631/2023 and 25.8.2014 in the case of O.A 12/2023. So in both cases, they were appointed later than the department amended the rules by a new notification dated 4.8.2014 which changed the rules. There is no contest that the department had no inherent power to change its rules and the applicant contends that the said new rules are discriminatory because it makes two classes of employees; i.e, one class of employees who were there in the organisation before the notification of new rules dated 4.8.2014 and the said class of employees will be governed by the earlier rules of 15.2.2006 and those who were recruited after 4.8.2014 will be governed by the new rules as contained in O.M dated 4.8.2014. But this is not a discrimination. An Organisation can make such distinction for such existing staff who were recruited during a different rule prevailing in the organisation and those who were recruited after the change of rules. It cannot be said to be even irrational or illegal.
SHAINESHAINEY VIJU CAT Bangalore Y VIJU 2025.02.25 16:30:34+05'30' 17 O.A.Nos.170/631/23 & 170/12 2024/CAT/BANGALORE
28. Hence, we do not find any strength in the contentions of the applicants and we do not find any merit in the case of the applicants. Both the applicants have not contested whether Annexure A-1 O.M dated 15.2.2006 and Annexure A-3 O.M dated 4.8.2014 were rather the rules at all. As we can see that the respondents have not gone through the proper process of rulemaking and notifying the rules in the form of rule. As from the very appearance of the same they do not appear to be in either proper format declaring the authorities under which the rules have been framed and the date of gazetting of the said rule and the process of rulemaking where opportunities were granted to the interested stakeholders to response to the draft rules and then notifying the new rules. That process has not happened either in the case of the 2006 rules or in the case of the 2014 rules. Hence, we are not setting aside the said Office Memorandums, as by their mere continuance and acceptance by the stakeholders they have become rules in force in the absence of any formally gazetted rules. However, the respondent organisation is advised to strictly adhere to the process of rulemaking and the structure of rules as has been prescribed for cadre and recruitment rules by the general circular of the DoP&T dated 31.12.2010.
SHAINESHAINEY VIJU CAT Bangalore Y VIJU 2025.02.25 16:30:34+05'30' 18 O.A.Nos.170/631/23 & 170/12 2024/CAT/BANGALORE
29. With the above observations, we pass the following orders:
As there is no grounds put forth for the condonation of delay for challenging the O.M dated 4.8.2014 hence the M.A 500/2023 is hereby dismissed. And as there is no merit in this case, hence these Original Applications devoid of merit, are dismiss accordingly.
Accordingly all pending M.As if any are also disposed of. No order as to cost.
Sd/- sd/-
(DR. SANJIV KUMAR) (JUSTICE B.K.SHRIVASTAVA)
MEMBER (A) MEMBER (J)
/SV/
SHAINESHAINEY VIJU
CAT Bangalore
Y VIJU 2025.02.25
16:30:34+05'30'