Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Beena vs M/O Defence on 11 May, 2016
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
PRINCIPAL BENCH
O.A.NO.960 OF 2014
New Delhi, this the 11th day of May, 2016
CORAM:
HON'BLE SHRI SUDHIR KUMAR, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER
AND
HON'BLE SHRI RAJ VIR SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER
.............
Smt.Beena,
w/o Sh.Sukhveer Singh,
39-40, Kantapuri (Janakpur),
Mohali Road,
Mathura ..... Applicant
(By Advocate: Mr.V.K.Sharma)
Vs.
1. Union of India, through the Secretary to the Government of India,
Ministry of Defence,
South Block,
New Delhi
2. The Director General of Medical Services,
(DGMS-3 (B) Army Medical Corps (Army),
Integrated Headquarters of Ministry of Defence,
Sena Bhawan,
'L'Block,
DHQ Post Office,
New Delhi
3. The Deputy Director of Medical Services (Army),
Headquarters Uttar Bharat Area,
Army Medical Corps, Bareilly (UP)
4. The Commandant,
Military Hospital, Mathura (UP) .... Respondents
(By Advocate: Mr.Hilal Haider)
Page 1 of 7
2 OA 960/14
ORDER
Per Raj Vir Sharma, Member(J):
We have heard Mr.V.K.Sharma, the learned counsel appearing for the applicant, and Mr. Hilal Haider, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents.
2. The applicant has filed the present O.A. seeking the following reliefs:
"(a) That the respondents may kindly be directed by this Hon'ble Court to intimate the outcome of the selection made in respect of the notified post of Educator (Family Welfare Extension Educator) and in the event, the applicant held selected on merit of the select-list, order of her appointment to the notified post issued without any further delay.
(b) Allow any other further relief which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of this case in order to meet the ends of justice.
And (c ) Allow cost of this case in favour of the humble applicant."
3. The brief facts of the applicant's case are that the Commandant, Military Hospital, Mathura (respondent no.4) issued an advertisement dated 3.5.2013, which was published in the daily 'Amar Ujala' on 7.5.2013 (Annexure A/1), inviting applications from eligible persons for recruitment to one post of Family Welfare Extension Educator (Pay Scale: Rs.5200- 20200/- & Grade Pay Rs.2800) in the Military Hospital, Mathura Cantt (UP). Thereafter, the said respondent no.4 issued a call letter dated 11.6.2013 (Annexure A/2), the relevant portion of which is reproduced below:
Page 2 of 7 3 OA 960/14
"2. It is intimated that Schedule for conduct of the selection for the above post is as under:
(a) Scrutiny and verifications of original certificates/testimonials with their photocopies will be on 27 Jun 13 (Thursday) wef 0900 hrs to 1000 hrs. Venue - Conference Hall of MH Mathura
(b) Conduct of written test on 27 Jun 13 wef 1130 hrs to 1230 hrs Venue - Conference Hall of MH Mathura (c ) Conduct of interview on 04 Jul 13 (Thursday) Wef 0930 hrs to 1200 hrs Venue - Conference Hal of MH Mathura."
3.1 It is the grievance of the applicant that though she and other candidates participated in the selection process as per the schedule indicated above, the respondent no.4 did not declare the result of selection. Therefore, she made a representation dated 23.9.2013 (Annexure A/3) requesting the Director General of Medical Services, Army Medical Corps (Army), Integrated Headquarters of Ministry of Defence, 'L' Block, Sena Bhawan, DHQ Post Office, New Delhi (respondent no.2), to look into the matter and intimate her the result of the said selection. There being no response, she made an application under the RTI Act on 25.11.2013 (Annexure A/4) to the said respondent no.2 to provide her information about the said selection process, and also filed the present O.A. on 25.11.2013 seeking the reliefs as aforesaid.
4. A Counter Reply, verified by Brig. P.S.K.Patel, Military Hospital, Mathura (respondent no.4), was filed on 11.3.2015 on behalf of all the respondents stating thus:
"6. That the letter of the applicant dated 23.09.2013 was not received by this office. However, the result by the respondent Page 3 of 7 4 OA 960/14 can only be declared after the receipt of approval from the competent authority.
It is however submitted that now it has been intimated by IHQ of MoD Army vide letter No.B/727748/OPT/2011-12 DGMS-38 dt.07th June 2013, through HQ Central Command (Med) vide letter No.334002/12/M-38/54 dated 29th Nov. 2013, that the recruitment process for the said post stands withdrawn because the same post (Gp 'C') of FWEE after 6th CPC pay scales falls under Gp B post which cannot be filled locally and is required to be filled through SSC on revision of recruitment rules by O/o DGAFMS, copy of the same is enclosed herewith as ANNEXURE 1-2.
7. That the RTI application was addressed to DGMS (Army) reply has been sent to the applicant on 08.01.2014, copy of the said is enclosed herewith as ANNEXURE R-2, after the same was received by the respondent through RTI Cell, ADG AE, vide letter No.A/810027/RTI/15314 (Tfr) Dt.27.12.2013."
5. The applicant has filed a Rejoinder Reply controverting the stand taken by the respondents that the post of Family Welfare Extension Educator is a Group 'B' post which cannot be filled locally and is required to be filled through Staff Selection Commission. Along with her Rejoinder Reply, the applicant has also filed a copy of the DoP&T's notification dated 1.1.2014 under which a Central civil post carrying Grade Pay of Rs.2,800/- in PB 1: Rs.5200-20,200/- has been classified as a Group 'C' post.
6. Along with their affidavit filed on 4.5.2016, the respondents have filed a copy of the letter No. B/72748/Opt.2011-12/DGMS-3B, dated 1.11.2013 issued by the Integrated HQ of Ministry of Defence (Army), Directorate General of Medical Services (Army), Adjutant General's Branch, New Delhi, to the FWC C/O MH Mathura, the relevant portion of which is reproduced below:
Page 4 of 7 5 OA 960/14
"2. NAC for one vacancy of FWEE at your hospital was released vide this HQ letter under reference dated 07 Jun 2012. It has now been intimated by the O/o DGAFMS that Recruitment Rules for the post of FWEE are under revision. They have intimated that as per 6th CPC, the pay scale of FWEE is PB-2 (9300-34800) with grade pay Rs.4600. As the posts in grade pay of Rs.4600/- falls under Gp 'B' posts, the same cannot be filled locally and is to be filled through SSC on revision of Recruitment Rules by O/O DGAFMS. In view of this, NAC issued for the post of FWEE vide this HQ letter under reference be treated as cancelled. In case, the unit has already initiated recruitment process, the same be withdrawn." The respondents have also filed a copy of the letter dated 13.11.2013 issued by the Headquarters, Central Command, Lucknow-2, the relevant portion of which is reproduced below:
"3. NAC issued for the post of FWEE at MH Mathura vide IHQ at MoD (Army)/DGMS-3B letter No. B/72748/Opt 2011- 12/DGMS-3B dt 07 Jun 2013 has been cancelled vide IHQ of MoD (Army)/DGMS-3B letter No.B/72748/Opt-2011- 12/DGMS-3B dt 01 Nov 2013 (copy enclosed). Accordingly, the subject Bd proceedings need not be processed further."
7. After having perused the materials placed before us, we have found that the post of Family Welfare Extension Educator (FWEE) in the respondent-Department was placed in PB 2 - Rs.9300-34800/- + Grade Pay of Rs.4600/- as per the recommendation of the 6th Central Pay Commission which was implemented by the Government with effect from 1.1.2006. However, when the Recruitment Rules for the post of FWEE were under revision, the advertisement for filling up the post of FWEE in the Military Hospital, Mathura, was issued by respondent no.4 inadvertently mentioning therein the pay scale of the said post as PB-1: Rs.5200-20200/- + Grade Pay Rs.2800/-. Even prior to coming into force of the notification dated 1.1.2014 Page 5 of 7 6 OA 960/14 (ibid), a civil post carrying Grade Pay of Rs.2800/- was classified as a Group 'C' post, and a civil post carrying Grade Pay of Rs.4600/-was classified as a Group 'B' post. Therefore, irrespective of the fact as to whether or not the Recruitment Rules were revised/amended placing the post of FWEE in PB 2:Rs.9300-34800/- + Grade Pay of Rs.4600/-, and classifying the same as a Group 'B' post, the said post having already been placed in PB 2: Rs.9300- 34800/- + Grade Pay of Rs.4600/- with effect from 1.1.2006 stood classified as a Group 'B' post at all relevant points of time, and the revision of the Recruitment Rules was of a formal nature. Therefore, we do not find any substance in the contention of the applicant that the revision/amendment of the Recruitment Rules being prospective in its application, and such revision/amendment of the Recruitment Rules having not yet taken place, the respondent-Department could not have treated the post of FWEE as a Group 'B' post, and cancelled the recruitment process initiated in May 2013. It is not in dispute that the respondent-Department did not have the power to make recruitment to Group 'B' posts, and that the Staff Selection Commission was the recruiting agency to make recruitment to Group 'B' posts in the respondent-Department. As the post of FWEE was already placed in PB-2: Rs.9300-34800 + Grade Pay of Rs.4600/- with effect from 1.1.2006, and all civil posts carrying PB-2: Rs.9300-34800 + Grade Pay of Rs.4600/- were classified as Group 'B' posts before coming into force of the notification dated 1.1.2014, ibid, and the respondent-Department did not have the power to make recruitment to Group 'B' posts, the advertisement Page 6 of 7 7 OA 960/14 issued by respondent no.4 on 7.5.2013 for filling up the post of FWEE and the selection process initiated pursuant thereto stood vitiated. Thus, there is no infirmity in the decision of the respondent-Department cancelling the entire recruitment process. Therefore, we do not find any merit in the prayer made by the applicant in the O.A. to issue a direction to the respondent- Department to intimate the outcome of the selection process and to issue offer of appointment to her.
8. In the light of our above discussions, we hold that the O.A. is devoid of merit and liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the O.A. is dismissed. No costs.
(RAJ VIR SHARMA) (SUDHIR KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER AN Page 7 of 7 8 OA 960/14 Page 8 of 7