Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Jainender Kumar Prashar vs Union Of India on 10 September, 2009
Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench OA No.2578/2009 New Delhi, this the 10th day of September, 2009 Honble Mr. Justice M. Ramachandran, Vice Chairman(J) Honble Dr. Ramesh Chandra Panda, Member (A) Jainender Kumar Prashar Head Constable (Ex.) in Delhi Police Roll No.404580 PIS No.28931889 R/o H. No.1/2144 East Ram Nagar, Shahdara, Delhi-32. . Applicant. ( By Advocate : Shri Anil Singal) versus 1. Union of India through its Secretary Ministry of Home Affairs, North Block, New Delhi. 2. Lt. Governor of Delhi Raj Niwas, Delhi. 3. Commissioner of Police Police Headquarter, I. P. Estate, New Delhi. Respondents. : O R D E R (ORAL) : Dr. Ramesh Chandra Panda, Member (A) :
Shri Jainender Kumar Prashar, presently working as the Head Constable in Delhi Police, the Applicant herein, applied for the post of Sub Inspector (Executive) in Delhi Police, consequent to the recruitment advertisement issued on 4.10.2007. It is stated by the Applicant that he qualified in the physical and written examination and was also interviewed. He avers that he secured 121 marks. Initially, the cut of marks for departmental candidates was 123, but since 4 candidates were common and qualified in the recruitment held for both the years (2004 and 2007) and they joined against the recruitment for the year 2004. The Respondents appointed next 4 candidates in the merit list for those 4 vacancies of the year 2007, who seem to have secured 122 marks. Vide this Tribunals order dated 6.1.2009 in OA Nos.2109/2008 and 2402/2008, the Respondents were directed to appoint two candidates from the select list if found fit for the next 2 candidates in the merit list. It is stated that these two candidates have secured 122 and 121 marks respectively, as a result, the cut of mark has come down to 121. It is stated by the Applicant that out of 36 departmental unreserved vacancies, 34 vacancies have been filled up. He submits that the vacancies still exist in this category with Delhi Police. It is the applicants case that if the available vacancies are filled up, he would be eligible for selection as one of the candidates for the existing vacancies under departmental unreserved category for the post of Sub Inspector (Exe.).
2. Shri Anil Singal appearing on behalf of the Applicant submits that the Applicant has already given representation dated 4.2.2009 to the Commissioner of Police, which is still under consideration. He also brought to our notice that this Tribunal in OA No.987/2009 dated 17.04.2009 directed the Respondents that if candidature of Shri Pushpendra Kumar Saroha and Sh. Rajeev is cancelled, the respondents will consider promotion of the Applicant if he has already qualified under the Limited Departmental Competitive Examination in accordance with Rules. He, therefore, pleaded that it would suffice if the Respondents are directed to consider the request/representation of the Applicant along with OA and pass a considered order with regard to the Applicants request for appointment to the post of Sub Inspector (Exe.) in the category of departmental unreserved vacancies.
3. Having heard the learned Counsel for the Applicant, we note that it would not be necessary at the admission stage to issue any notice to the Respondents but it would suffice for us to direct the Respondent No.3 to consider the representation already pending with him and take the present OA as supplementary representation and consider the Applicants candidature as per law, taking into account the vacancies available in the category and the contentions raised regarding the availability of vacancies, and pass the order within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
4. With the above directions, OA stands disposed of. No costs.
(Dr. Ramesh Chandra Panda) (M. Ramachandran)
Member (A) Vice Chairman (J)
/pj/