Central Administrative Tribunal - Bangalore
Tejaswini S N vs D/O Posts on 26 September, 2022
1 OA No.397/2022
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
BANGALORE BENCH, BENGALURU
ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.170/00
NO.170/00397/2022
DAY, DATED THIS THE 26th DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2022
MONDAY,
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE S SUJATHA ...MEMBER(J)
HON'BLE MR.RAKESH KUMAR GUPTA ...MEMBER(A)
Ms. Tejaswini S.N.,
D/o Narayana,
Aged about 32 years,
Resident of 'Sambhrama', #28,
Near Sathyanarayana Hospital,
Gururaja Layout, Mysuru - 29.
Working as Postwoman,
Alanahalli Post Office - 570 028.
Mysuru. .... Applicant
(ByAdvocate
ByAdvocate Shri B.S.Venkatesh Kumar )
Vs.
1. The Union of India,
Rep by its Secretary,
Department of Post,
Ministry of Communication and IT.,
Dak Bhavan, Sansad Marg,
New Delhi - 110 001.
2. The Chief Postmaster General,
Karnataka Circle,
Palace Road, Bangalore -560 001.
2 OA No.397/2022
3. The Postmaster General,
S.K.Region, II Floor,
GPO Building, Bangalore -560 001.
4. The Sr.Superintendent of Post Offices,
Mysuru Division,
Mysuru-570
570 020.
5. The In-charge,
charge, Data Entry Skill Test &
Sr. Supdt of Post Offices,
Mangalore Division,
Mangalore - 575 001. ...Respondents
O R D E R (ORAL
ORAL)
Per: Justice S.Sujatha ...........Member(J)
The applicant has challenged the order /message dated 18.09.2022 (Annexure A5) issued by the Respondent Respondent-5, inter alia seeking a direction to the respondents to conduct re-Data Entry Skill Test to the applicant.
2. Briefly stated the facts are that the applic applicant who belongs to ST category was initially appointed as GDS MP with effect from 13.02.2009 was promoted to the cadre of Postman with effect from 11.09.2020. Pursuant to the notification issued by the 2nd Respondent under No.R&E/1-12/LGO/2022 No.R& 12/LGO/2022 dated 24.06.2022 (Annexure A1) for conducting Limited Departmental Competitive Examination (LDCE) 3 OA No.397/2022 for promotion to the cadre of Postal Assistants (Circle Office and Regional Offices), Postal Assistant (Savings Bank Control and Internal Check Check Organisations, Postal Assistant (Post Office) and Sorting Assistant for the vacancy year 2022, the applicant appeared and qualified in the said LDCE. The 2nd Respondent vide notification dated 15.09.2022 declared the list of candidates eligible for appearing ppearing in the Data Entry Skill Test ((DEST for short) and fixed the date of DEST on 18.09.2022. Accordingly, the applicant participated in the said test.
3. It is the grievance of the applicant that the computer system in which DEST software was installed installed and allotted to the applicant was not working properly. Owing to which she requested the room invigilator to return her DEST paper but in vain. Hence she submitted a representation to the respondents through whatsapp requesting for conducting re-DEST ST as there was some error in the computer system allotted to her to which a reply has been sent rejecting her request. Hence this application.
4. Learned Counsel, Shri B.S.Venkatesh Kumar, appearing for the applicant submitted that the applicant having good academic record and typing speed of 150 to 200 characters per minute, is having good 4 OA No.397/2022 experience in typing work. The error in the system has caused great hardship resulting in her disqualification. Any technical error in the computer system would have been set right, but that having not been done at the earliest point of time, it was obligatory for the respondents to provide a re-DEST re DEST in the interest of justice. Hence seeks for the such a relief.
5. We have heard learned Counsel for the applica applicant and perused the material on record.
6. It is well settled law that any candidate appearing for DEST should possess the knowledge of operating the computer system. If any such computer system allotted to a candidate has any technical glitches, it should be revealed to the invigilator at the first opportunity provided to address the problem before clicking the 'Start Test' Button.
7. It is discernable that the applicant made an attempt to seek rre- DEST request for return of the test paper from the invigilator invigilator. A representation made by the applicant on this ground praying for re re-
DEST has been turned down categorically stating that there was no problem in the machine which was clearly communicated to the candidate when she requested for re-DEST re in the examination control 5 OA No.397/2022 room immediately after the examination. It has been observed that the reason for low score is not due to problem in the system but due to incorrect typing which is evident in the print copy of the answer sheet. Thus the reasons for rejection of prayer for re re-DEST cannot be held to be arbitrary and untenable.
8. As per the normal procedure prescribed for DEST DEST, a qualifying exam to assess the ability and skill of the candidate candidate, once the 'Start Test' button is clicked the Data for the test would be available for a particular prescribed time and thereafter Timer comes to zero. Application will perform 'Auto submit' to save the date. Before operating the computer system for DEST, the candidate has the opportunity to get used to the particular system and thereafter the test will start. It is significant to note that the learned Counsel for the applicant has failed to point out any Rule Rule providing for conducting re re-
DEST for the candidates.
candidates. In the absence of such Rule and on the pretext of error in the computer system, no re re-DEST would be permissible. A candidate having consciously participated in the DEST cannot turnaround and seek for the test to be re re-conducted.
9. We are afraid that the prayer of the applicant if allowed allowed, would open a Pandora box for the unsuccessful candidates to take the ground 6 OA No.397/2022 of error in the computer system for scoring less marks. The purpose of DEST to test test the skill of the candidate having regard to the time period ass well, providing re-DEST re DEST would be nothing but duplication of work obstructing the finality to the test, when the computer system is held to be in order by the respondents, w while rejecting the representation.
10. For the reasons aforesaid, we find no ground to interfere with the impugned order/message dated 18.09.2022 issued by the 5th Respondent. OA is devoid of merit and is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs.
(RAKESH KUMAR GUPTA) (JUSTICE S.SUJATHA)
MEMBER(A) MEMBER(J)
sd.
7 OA No.397/2022