Central Administrative Tribunal - Bangalore
Mn Narasimha Murthy vs M/O Personnel,Public Grievances And ... on 12 December, 2023
1 OA 543/2019/CAT/BANGALORE BENCH
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
BANGALORE BENCH, BENGALURU
ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.170/00543/2019
ORDER RESERVED : 29.11.2023
DATE OF ORDER : 12.12.2023
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE S SUJATHA ...MEMBER(J)
HON'BLE MR.RAKESH KUMAR GUPTA ...MEMBER(A)
Shri M.N.Narasimha Murthy,
S/o N.Narasiyappa,
Aged 46 years,
Working as Intelligence Officer,
Office of the Principal Additional Director General,
Directorate of Revenue Intelligence,
Zonal Unit, No.8(2)/P,
Opposite to BDA Complex,
H.B.R.Layout,
Kalyananagar Post,
Bengaluru -560043.
Residing at No.09, 'H' Block,
Central Excise & Customs Staff Quarters,
B.T.M. Layout,
Bangalore -560068. ...Applicant
(Party in person)
Vs.
2 OA 543/2019/CAT/BANGALORE BENCH
1. Union of India,
Represented by the Secretary,
Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances
And Pensions, Department of Personnel
And Training, North Block,
New Delhi - 110001.
2. The Union of India,
Represented by the Secretary,
Ministry of Finance,
Department of Revenue,
Central Board of Excise & Customs,
North Block,
New Delhi -110001.
3. The Chairman,
Central Board of Indirect Taxes & Customs,
North Block,
New Delhi -110001.
4. The Director General,
Directorate of General of Performance Management,
Customs, Central Goods and Service Tax,
5th Floor, 'D' Block, I.P.Bhavan, I.P.Estate,
New Delhi -110002.
5. The Principal Director General,
Directorate of Revenue Intelligence,
Hqrs., 7th Floor, 'D' Block, I.P.Bhavan,
I.P.Estate, New Delhi -110002.
3 OA 543/2019/CAT/BANGALORE BENCH
6. The Principal Additional Director General,
Directorate of Revenue Intelligence,
Zonal Unit, No.8(2)/P, Opposite to BDA Complex,
H.B.R.Layout, Kalyananagar Post,
Bengaluru-560043.
7. Shri J.P.Raju, Intelligence Officer,
Now Superintendent (Central Excise),
Directorate of Revenue Intelligence,
Delhi Zonal Unit, B-3 & 4,6th Floor,
Pt. Deendayal Anthyodaya Bhawan,
CGO Complex, Lodhi road,
New Delhi -110003.
8. Shri Mahesh Chand,
Intelligence Officer,
Now Superintendent (Central Excise),
Directorate of Revenue Intelligence,
Delhi Zonal Unit, B-3 & 4, 6th Floor,
Pt. Deendayal Anthyodaya Bhawan,
CGO Complex, Lodhi Road,
New Delhi -110003.
9. Smt.Suma Appukuttan,
Intelligence Officer,
Directorate of Revenue Intelligence,
Mumbai Zonal Unit, 3rd, 4th & 5th Floor,
13, Sir Vithaldas Thackersey Marg,
Opp. Patkar Hall, New Marine Line,
Mumbai -400020.
4 OA 543/2019/CAT/BANGALORE BENCH
10.Shri Rajeev K.Sadana,
Intelligence Officer,
Now Superintendent (Central Excise),
Directorate of Revenue Intelligence,
Delhi Zonal Unit, B-3 & 4, 6th Floor,
Pt. Deendayala Anthyodaya Bhawan,
CGO Complex, Lodhi Road,
New Delhi - 110003.
11.Shri Ajay Bhasin,
Intelligence Officer,
Now Superintendent (Central Excise),
Directorate General of Vigilance,
Zonal Unit, Customs and Central Excise,
7-R, Dalibagh, Lucknow-226001.
12.Shri Rohit Issar,
Intelligence Officer,
Now Superintendent (Central Excise),
Directorate General of Goods and Service
Tax Intelligence, West Block VIII,
Wing No.VI, 2nd Floor, R.K.Puram,
New Delhi -110066.
13.Shri Vinod Kumar,
Intelligence Officer,
Now Superintendent (Central Excise),
Directorate General of Analytics and
Risk Management, UG Floor,
EIL Annexe Building,
Bhikaji Cama Place,
New Delhi - 110066.
5 OA 543/2019/CAT/BANGALORE BENCH
14.Shri Kuldeep Singh Nijhar,
Intelligence Officer,
Now Superintendent (Central Excise),
Directorate General of Goods and Service
Tax Intelligence,
West Block VIII,
Wing No.VI, 2nd Floor,
R.K.Puram,
New Delhi -110066.
15.Shri Vinay Verma,
Intelligence Officer,
Now Superintendent (Central Excise),
Directorate of General of Performance,
Management, Customs, Central Goods
And Service Tax,
5th Floor, 'D' Block,
I.P.Bhavan, I.P.Estate,
New Delhi -110002.
16.Shri Rajesh M. Nair,
Intelligence Officer,
(Voluntarily Retired),
Directorate of Revenue Intelligence,
Mumbai Zonal Unit,
3rd, 4th & 5th Floor, 13,
Sir Vithaldas Thackersey Marg,
Opp. Patkar Hall,
New Marine Lines,
Mumbai -400020. ...Respondents
(By Advocate, Shri Vishnu Bhat for Respondents No.1 to 6)
6 OA 543/2019/CAT/BANGALORE BENCH
ORDER
Per: Justice S.Sujatha ...........Member(J)
The applicant has filed this application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 seeking the following reliefs:
"i) To direct the Respondents No.1 to 6 to publish the modified list for 10 posts in the grade of Intelligence Officer as at Annexure A-6 Order No.50/2009 dated 29.07.2009 in accordance with Post Based Roster Points and Seniority Rules as the same is injust, unlawful and ultravires of the provisions of Article 14, 15 and 16 of the Constitution of India.
ii) To direct the Respondent No.1 to produce the Post Based Reservation Roster Register as on 28.07.2009 for the post of Intelligence officer, DRI/DGCEI under Recruitment Rules GSR 498, dated 11.08.1990.
iii) To grant all the consequential monetary/seniority benefits in the grade of Intelligence Officer w.e.f 29.07.2009 in the Pay Band-2 Rs.9300-34800 + Grade Pay Rs.4600 and in the grade of Superintendent (Central Excise) w.e.f. 04.01.2019 in the Pay Band-2 Rs.9300-34800 + Grade Pay Rs.4800.
7 OA 543/2019/CAT/BANGALORE BENCH
iv) To pass such other orders as this Honourable Tribunal deems fit and expedient in the facts and circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity."
2. The applicant working as Intelligence Officer, DRI, Bangalore, is aggrieved by non-consideration of his promotion to the grade of Intelligence Officer as per seniority against backlog vacancy claimed with effect from 29.07.2009 meant for Scheduled Tribe. Originally the applicant had filed OA No.58/2008 before this Tribunal for getting promotion as Senior Tax Assistant with retrospective effect from 2003 and further promotion as Intelligence Officer on par with another officer, inter alia seeking a direction to the department to frame proper Recruitment Rules for the post of Intelligence Officer and higher cadres so as to provide equal opportunity of promotion. The said OA came to be disposed of, as withdrawn vide order dated 01.12.2008 however, with the following directions:
"...........Further, the respondents shall take appropriate steps whatsoever in accordance with law either to frame Recruitment Rules or as the case may, be within a period of 4 months."
8 OA 543/2019/CAT/BANGALORE BENCH Pursuant to which draft Rules dated 03.02.2009 were framed and submitted to Department of Personnel and Training, New Delhi. Subsequently, the applicant filed OA No.298/2009 seeking for the following reliefs:
"i) To call for the relevant records leading to the issuance of DRI.F.No.A-34011/1/2007-Estt. dated 06.07.2009 at Annexure-B (result of the departmental promotional examination held on 5th, 6th and 8th May, 2009 for the post of Intelligence Officer in the Directorate of Revenue, Intelligence and Directorate General of Central Excise Intelligence declared) on perusal to stay the operation of the same as unjust, unlawful and ultra vires the provisions of Articles 14, 15 and 16 of the Constitution of India.
ii) To direct the respondents not to consider the candidature of lower qualified persons than the applicant for the post of Intelligence Officer.
iii) To direct the respondents to follow the Reservation Policy as per law for the appointment of Intelligence Officer.
vi) To direct the respondent to give promotion to the applicant for the post of Intelligence Officer with consequential monetary benefits.
v) To award the cost of this application.
vi) To pass such other orders as this Hon'ble Tribunal deems
fit and expedient in the facts and circumstances of the case."
9 OA 543/2019/CAT/BANGALORE BENCH
3. In the meantime on 29.07.2009, the respondents prepared a promotion panel of 13 candidates including extended panel of more candidates in the order of merit based on the recommendation of Departmental Promotion Committee constituted for promotion to the cadre of Intelligence Officer. The Tribunal vide order dated 01.10.2010 allowed the applicant to withdraw the said OA No.298/2009 giving liberty to file fresh comprehensive OA challenging the order dated 29.07.2009. Accordingly, comprehensive OA No.434/2010 was filed by the applicant seeking for the following reliefs:
"i) To call for the records leading to the issuance of Memorandum DRI.F.No.A-34011/1/2007-Estt., dated 29.07.2009 at Annexure A9 and Order No.50/2009, dated 29.07.2009 at Annexure A-16, on perusal to quash the same as injust, unlawful and ultravires of the provisions of Article 14, 15 and 16 of the Constitution of India.
ii) To Direct the Respondents to produce the seniority list in the feeder cadres as on 06.07.2009 and details of marks obtained by the qualified candidates in the examination and dates of occurrence of vacancies.
10 OA 543/2019/CAT/BANGALORE BENCH
iii) To direct the Respondents to produce the Copy of the Post Based Reservation Roster Register in respect of the Post of Intelligence Officer as on 06.07.2009.
iv) To direct the Respondents to grant promotion to the applicant for the post of Intelligence Officer with retrospective effect as on date of arising of vacancy as per Roster Points under existing Recruitment Rules GSR 498 dated 11.08.1990
v) To direct the Respondents to consider the applicant's Seniority with Retrospective effect in the post of Intelligence Officer which will effect for future promotions.
vi) To direct the respondents to grant all consequential benefits to me.
vii) To pass such other orders as this Honourable Tribunal deems fit and expedient in the facts and circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity".
4. The said OA has been disposed of vide order dated 09.08.2011 holding that the post of Intelligence Officer has to be filled up by promotion and the cadres of STA or Stenographer Gr.II or Assistant are only to be treated as feeder cadres, reserving liberty to the Department to fill up the post through the channel of deputation or transfer as and when they are taking employees from other departments. However, as the issue therein confined only with respect to the impugned lists through 11 OA 543/2019/CAT/BANGALORE BENCH which the post of Intelligence Officers are sought to be filled from out of STA, Stenographer Gr.II etc., it was further held that those two lists has undoubtedly fall in the category of promotion and cannot be treated as either transfer or deputation. In view of this, it has been categorically held that the department is duty bound to observe the reservation policy as per law. Accordingly, directed the respondent department to recast the merit list of 10 vacancies as was sought to be filled by Annexure A6 herein, accommodate the candidates eligible on the basis of reservation and in particular accommodate the applicant as per his roster point as applicable to the promotional post. On the basis of such list, the respondents were directed to issue necessary orders of promotion to the applicant with necessary retrospective effect having regard to the date on which the other candidates in the list, Annexure A6 herein (Annexure A16 in OA No.434/2010) have started officiating. The relevant paragraphs of the order in the said OA are quoted hereunder for ready reference:
"11. In view of the above, we have no doubt that the post of Intelligence Officer has been getting filled by promotion and the cadres of either STA or Stenographer Gr.II or Assistant are only to be treated as feeder cadres. We agree that the department is also at liberty to fill up the post through the channel of deputation 12 OA 543/2019/CAT/BANGALORE BENCH or transfer as and when they are taking employees from other departments. However, the present issue confines only with respect to the two impugned lists through which the post of Intelligence Officers are sought to be filled from out of STA, Stenographer Gr.II, etc., and those two lists undoubtedly fall in the category of promotion and cannot be treated as either transfer or deputation.
12. In view of this, the department is duty bound to observe the reservation policy as per the law. We therefore consider it necessary, just and fair to direct the respondent department to recast the final merit list for the ten vacancies as was sought to be filled by Annexure-A/16, accommodate the candidates eligible on the basis of reservation and in particular, accommodate the applicant as per his roster point as applicable to the promotional post. On the basis of such list, the respondents will issue necessary orders of promotion to the applicant with necessary retrospective effect having regard to the date on which the other candidates in the list at Annexure-A/16 have started officiating. Within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order such modified list shall be published along with the necessary posting order to the applicant. The consequential benefits will be paid to the applicant within two months thereafter. No order as to costs."
13 OA 543/2019/CAT/BANGALORE BENCH
5. Being aggrieved, the respondents herein preferred W.P.No.47318/2011 before the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka unsuccessfully and on further challenge before the Holn'ble Apex Court in SLP No.4370/2015, the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in W.P.No.47318/2011 was confirmed, dismissing the SLP. Subsequently, C.P.No.21/2018 filed by the applicant alleging non- compliance of the order of this Tribunal passed in OA No.434/2010 has been disposed of, on 14.09.2018 reserving liberty to the applicant to agitate the comparative merit of the candidates in a fresh OA after impleading the necessary parties. Thereafter, the applicant has filed the present OA. This Tribunal vide order dated 01.08.2019 allowed the OA.
6. Feeling aggrieved with the said order dated 01.08.2019, the respondents herein, preferred W.P.No.25915/2022 before the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka. The said writ petition has been disposed of, vide order dated 28.07.2023 setting aside the order passed by this Tribunal dated 01.08.2019 and remanding the matter for fresh consideration to ascertain when three backlog vacancies meant for ST were available and from what date those vacancies arose. Accordingly, the matter is placed before the Bench.
14 OA 543/2019/CAT/BANGALORE BENCH
7. The Applicant, party in person submitted that as per the draft Recruitment Rules of 2009, for the grade of Intelligence Officer, the first preference has to be given to the feeder cadre in the grade of Senior Tax Assistant with pay scale of Rs.5000-8000 and second preference has to be given to the Tax Assistant, which is feeder cadre to the post of Senior Tax Assistant with pay scale of Rs.4000-6000, if eligible persons are not available in the STA cadre. On 29.07.2009, 10 candidates were selected to the grade of Intelligence Officer in the order of merit. In OA No.298/2009, this Tribunal has directed the respondents to file additional reply in the form of affidavit explaining the logic and rationale of the harmonious reconciliation of seniority, having noticed that there is no transparency in the recruitment of Intelligence Officer, a detailed interim order was passed in the said OA No.298/2009 on 01.10.2010. However, in view of withdrawal of OA No.298/2009 with liberty to file a comprehensive OA, the observation made by the Tribunal cannot be wiped out.
8. Applicant- party in person submitted that the respondents having recasted the final merit list and accommodated him on the basis of reservation as per his roster point with effect from 17.09.2010 failed 15 OA 543/2019/CAT/BANGALORE BENCH to issue promotion to him with retrospective effect, having regard to the date on which other candidates in the list, i.e., Order No.50/2009 were promoted with effect from 29.07.2009. The applicant, party in person further argued that the saving clause inserted in the Recruitment Rules dated 11.08.1990 safeguards the reservation policy. As per the information received under the Right to Information Act, 2005, the post of Intelligence Officer under the GSR 498 dated 11.08.1990 is not exempted from the operation of reservation policy. Accordingly, three posts were reserved for Scheduled Tribe, out of total number of 340 posts, 85% of posts namely 289 are meant for deputation from other departments, 15% of posts i.e., 51 posts are meant for feeder cadre, 15% of posts i.e., 7.6 (7 posts) are meant for Scheduled Caste out of 51 posts, 7.5.% of posts i.e., 3.8 (3 posts) meant for Scheduled Tribe out of 51 posts. The post at Sl.No.14, 28, 40 vacancies in the grade of Intelligence Officer were existing from 2003 onwards and as per the Minutes of the meeting of Departmental Promotion Committee submitted by the respondents in OA No.298/2009, five vacancies were existing as on 29.07.2009. Since the respondents have never applied the reservation policy and all the posts were filled up based on merit, the posts meant for SC/ST were occupied by the general category even not observing the 16 OA 543/2019/CAT/BANGALORE BENCH seniority in the feeder cadre. All the persons recruited to the post of Intelligence Officer prior to 2009 are recruited by selection on merit only. Accordingly, three posts which were vacant from the year 2003 are backlog posts meant for Scheduled Tribe and the said posts are allocated to general category persons vide order No.50/2009 dated 29.07.2009. Thus the applicant-party in person submitted that he has to be placed above Shri Ajay Bhasin , Tax Assistant, his next immediate junior. It is the grievance of the applicant that Shri Ajay Bhasin, who was Tax Assistant on 29.07.2009 has been directly promoted to the post of Intelligence Officer by-passing the post of Senior Tax Assistant. According to the applicant, no merit selection was existing under the service rules for Group 'B' and 'C' posts with effect from 08.02.2022 consequent to issue of Office Memorandum No.F.No.35034/7/97- Estt(D) by the Department of Personnel and Training, New Delhi. In sum and substance, the argument of the applicant - party in person is that the roster point has to be applied from the date of the Recruitment Rules of Intelligence Officer coming into force and not prospectively from the date of order passed by the Tribunal in OA No.434/2010.
17 OA 543/2019/CAT/BANGALORE BENCH
9. Per contra, learned Counsel Shri Vishnu Bhat representing the respondents argued that the list of 10 vacancies was recasted as per the order of the Tribunal dated 09.08.2011 in OA No.434/2010. On the basis of such recasting, the first reserved position for Scheduled Tribe category candidate emerges at 14th position. The applicant belonging to Scheduled Tribe category was appointed to officiate as Intelligence Officer with effect from 17.09.2010 i.e., the date on which the vacancy arose for the 14th roster point and therefore his date of promotion cannot be revised to 29.07.2009. The issue inasmuch as general category candidates are selected on merit basis on the recommendation of DPC as per the list dated 29.07.2009 in violation of reservation policy alleged has been settled by this Tribunal in OA No.434/2010 and CP.No.21/2018. Tax Assistants having not less than 10 years of service are eligible to be promoted as Intelligence Officer as per the Recruitment Rules. The substantive issues involved in the present OA have been agitated by the applicant before the judicial forums including this Tribunal and the same has been adjudged and reached finality. Reservation policy has to be applied for the final merit list of 10 vacancies, Annexure A6 herein as directed by this Tribunal in OA No.434/2010. No three backlog vacancies of ST category existed as 18 OA 543/2019/CAT/BANGALORE BENCH argued by the applicant. The first reservation roster point of ST category being at 14, the applicant cannot be placed in the first ten, in the list of candidates who are selected through DPC on merit basis. Thus seeks for dismissal of the application.
10. Having heard the applicant-party in person and the learned Counsel for the respondents, the sole point that arises for our consideration is, whether any backlog vacancies meant for ST category were available while preparing the promotion selection panel list dated 29.07.2009 for the post of Intelligence Officer?
11. Directorate of Revenue Intelligence and Directorate of Anti- Evasion (Group 'C' and 'D' posts) Recruitment Rules, 1990, did not consider the point of Intelligence Officer as promotion rather it was considered as transfer. This Tribunal in OA No.434/2010 held that filling up of the post of Intelligence Officer is promotion from the feeder cadres of STA, Steno Grade-II and Assistant to which reservation policy is applicable and such promotions cannot be treated as either transfer or deputation which has been confirmed by the Hon'ble High Court and the Hon'ble Apex Court. Thus, it is clear that prior to orders passed by this Tribunal on 09.08.2011 in OA 19 OA 543/2019/CAT/BANGALORE BENCH No.434/2010, filling up of the post of Intelligence Officer was treated as either transfer or deputation. C.P.No.21/2018 in OA No.434/2010 filed by the applicant was disposed of, by this Tribunal and the said order reads thus:
"Heard. Apparently the applicant being a Scheduled Tribe candidate could have come in only in the 14th position which the respondents have granted him and which is also the focus and content of our order. Now he claims that some of his juniors were also promoted above him which normally does not appear to be correct because according to the learned Additional Solicitor General the applicant came to the 14th position also only because of the reservation policy. Taken on merit alone, he would not have reached such a position. Since those people were also parties in the earlier matter and since the focus was on reservation, the comparative merit of those candidates have not been adjudicated. Therefore we will now give liberty to the applicant to agitate it in a fresh OA after impleading all the necessary parties but the CP cannot lie for the simple fact that the basic content of the order has been satisfied.
2. The CP is therefore disposed off with liberty. Notices are discharged. No order as to costs."
It transpires that the applicant came to the 14th position only after following the reservation policy, taken on merit alone he would not 20 OA 543/2019/CAT/BANGALORE BENCH have reached that position. Liberty was reserved only to adjudicate the comparative merit of the candidates promoted to the post of Intelligence Officer. The arguments of the applicant relying on OM dated 08.02.2022 that, 'Selection by Merit' and 'Selection-cum- Seniority' is dispensed with and the mode of promotion in all such cases is rechristened as 'Selection' only, those who are graded 'fit' (i.e., who meet the prescribed bench -mark) by the DPC shall be included and arranged in the select panel in order of their inter-se seniority in the feeder cadre, could be made applicable if the feeder cadre is one. As decided by this Tribunal in OA No.434/2010, supra, Senior Tax Assistant, Steno Grade-II and Tax Assistant are the three different feeder cadres available for promotion to the post of Intelligence Officer.
12. In such circumstances, we cannot accede to the arguments of the applicant that Tax Assistants cannot be placed above the applicant (STA) considering his seniority in STA. Order No.50/2009 dated 29.07.2009 appointing 10 candidates as Intelligence Officer Group 'B' Non-Gazetted, has been issued pursuant to the selection process finalised by the DPC as could be seen from the material placed before 21 OA 543/2019/CAT/BANGALORE BENCH the Bench by the respondents. The Respondents conducted the departmental promotional examination for the post of Intelligence Officer and the results were declared vide order dated 06.07.2009. The candidates, who were declared as qualified were advised to appear for viva-voce on 14.07.2009. It is discernible from the Minutes of viva voce held on 14.07.2009 for considering the post of Ministerial staff appointment as Intelligence Officer in DRI/DGCEI, the Committee has adopted the procedure for selection based on the marks obtained (out of
50) in the ACR and the marks obtained (out of 50) in viva voce. After considering the total marks, the selection of the candidates has been made based on merit i.e., the total marks obtained by the candidates. If the selection is based on merit, then the question of seniority would not be relevant, more so, when the candidates are eligible for promotion from different feeder cadres. From the records placed before us, it is apparent that Shri Ajay Bashin, Tax Assistant has scored total 91 marks whereas the applicant herein has scored 76 marks and has come in the 27th place of merit list.
13. The draft Recruitment Rules of 2009 referred to by the applicant cannot have any force unless finalized. Recruitment Rules of 22 OA 543/2019/CAT/BANGALORE BENCH 1990 was holding the field but for the intervention of the courts, the appointment of Intelligence Officer was considered as deputation/transfer. As directed by this Tribunal in OA No.434/2010, reservation policy has to be applied for the 10 vacancies of promotion selection panel dated 29.07.2009 and has to be recasted. As such, the respondents have applied the reservation policy for the selection panel dated 29.07.2009. Considering the first roster point for ST category being at 14th position, the vacancy having arisen on 17.10.2010, the applicant has been promoted retrospectively in compliance with the directions issued in OA No.434/2010. As aforesaid, the department did not maintain a post based Reservation roster having regard to the Recruitment Rules, 1990 according to which the appointment of Intelligence Officer was considered as transfer/deputation. Therefore, there were no backlog vacancies available for reserved category prior to the date on which the Tribunal directed the department to apply reservation. Hence the applicant could only be appointed when the first vacancy arised for the reserved category. Thus, the arguments of the applicant that three backlog vacancies existed as on 29.07.2009 cannot be acceded to.
23 OA 543/2019/CAT/BANGALORE BENCH
14. It cannot be gainsaid that when the applicant participated in the selection process i.e., written examination, no decision had been rendered that the appointment of Intelligence Officer is nothing but promotion and reservation policy is applicable. It is well settled that the interpretation of provision of law relates back to the date of law itself, since the Courts are not legislating, but interpreting law. However, such principle is subject to the exception of the Court's verdict that such interpretation would have prospective effect. In our considered view, the intention of this Tribunal is apparent in directing the respondent department to recast the final merit list for the 10 vacancies as was sought to be filled by Annexure A6 herein, accommodating the candidates eligible on the basis of reservation and in particular, to accommodate the applicant as per his roster point as applicable to the promotional post. The applicant, who was at Sl. No.27 in the merit list, applying the reservation roster point, has now been placed at Sl.No.14 in compliance with the directions issued by this Tribunal in OA No.434/2010 reservation roster points being at 14, 28 and 40 for ST category as per OM No.36012/2/96-Estt (Res), dated 02.07.1997. In our considered opinion no three backlog vacancies were available on 29.07.2009 for ST category and the first vacancy 24 OA 543/2019/CAT/BANGALORE BENCH having arisen on 17.10.2010, the applicant has been promoted accordingly.
15. For the reasons aforesaid, OA is devoid of merit and accordingly stands dismissed. No order as to costs.
(RAKESH KUMAR GUPTA) (JUSTICE S.SUJATHA)
MEMBER(A) MEMBER(J)
sd.