Delhi High Court - Orders
Pranaita Gusain vs Union Of India And Ors on 4 May, 2021
Author: Rajiv Sahai Endlaw
Bench: Rajiv Sahai Endlaw, Amit Bansal
$~4
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 4675/2021
PRANAITA GUSAIN ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Himanshu Mehra, Advocate.
versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Vivek Goyal, CGSC with
Mr. Srivats Kaushal, Advocate.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT BANSAL
ORDER
% 04.05.2021 [VIA VIDEO CONFERENCING] C.M. No.14385/2021 (for exemption)
1. Allowed, subject to just exceptions and as per extant rules.
2. The application is disposed of.
W.P.(C) 4675/2021
3. The writ petition impugns the order dated 19th March, 2021 of Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench New Delhi, of dismissal of OA No.632/2021 preferred by the petitioner.
4. The petitioner, an Occupational Therapist (OT) at the Base Hospital at Delhi, filed the OA aforesaid, claiming discrimination in pay scale of an OT in DGMS (Navy).
5. We have enquired from the counsel for the petitioner, whether the recruitment of OT for DGMS (Army) as well as DGMS (Navy) is through a W.P.(C) 4675/2021 Page 1 of 2 common recruitment process.
6. The answer is in the negative.
7. We have next enquired from the counsel for the petitioner, the Recruitment Rules for an OT in DGMS (Army) and for an OT in DGMS (Navy).
8. The counsel for the petitioner states that he has not looked into that also.
9. The counsel for the petitioner however contends that the reasoning given in Para 5 of the impugned order is contrary to the judgments referred to in Ground (g) of the writ petition. However on enquiry, whether the said judgments have been read in entirety, the counsel for the petitioner states that he has only read and reproduced the headnotes.
10. A petition, particularly impugning an order of CAT negating a claim qua parity in pay scales by reasoning that the method of recruitment and qualification for the two posts are different, cannot be filed without studying the Recruitment Rules and reading in entirety the judgements on which reliance is being placed in the memorandum of the petition itself.
11. However, since the counsel for the petitioner appears to be young, we deem it appropriate to grant him an opportunity to study and place all the relevant documents and judgments on record.
12. List on 9th July, 2021.
RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J AMIT BANSAL, J MAY 04, 2021 ak W.P.(C) 4675/2021 Page 2 of 2