Central Administrative Tribunal - Bangalore
Rangaswamy H E vs D/O Posts on 9 November, 2022
1 OA No.442/2022
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
BANGALORE BENCH, BENGALURU
ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.170/00
NO.170/00442/2022
WEDNESDAY DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF NOVEMBER,, 2022
WEDNESDAY,
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE S SUJATHA ...MEMBER(J)
HON'BLE MR.RAKESH KUMAR GUPTA ...MEMBER(A)
Shri Rangaswamy H.E.,
Aged 48 years,
S/o Eraiah, Working as GDS BPM,
Savasihalli - BO,
A/W Hagare S.O. 573 216,
Hassan District,
Residing at: Savasihalli Village,
PO - 573 216, Belur Taluk,
Hassan District. .... Applicant
(ByAdvocate
ByAdvocate Shri P.Kamalesan )
Vs.
1. The Union of India,
Represented by Secretary,
Department of Post,
Dak Bhavan,
New Delhi - 110 001.
2. The Chief Post Master General,
Karnataka Circle,
Bangalore - 560 001.
2 OA No.442/2022
3. The Post Master General,
South Karnataka Region,
Bangalore - 560 001.
4. The Superintendent of Post Offices,
Hassan Division,
Hassan - 573 201. ...Respondents
O R D E R (ORAL
ORAL)
Per: Justice S.Sujatha ...........Member(J)
The applicant is seeking for a direction to the respondents to consider her representation dated 25.10.2 25.10.2022 (Annexure A4) and conduct Data Entry Skill Test (DEST) for the applicant, inter alia seeking a direction to the respondents to keep one post of Postman/Mail Guard vacant at Hassan Division in SC category, in the event of declaration of results, during the pendency of this OA.
2. The applicant is working as GDS BPM at Savasihalli BO under Hassan Postal Division. In pursuant to the notification issued vide letter No.R&E/2-19/2022 No.R&E/2 19/2022 dated 15.07.2022 by the office of the Chief Post Master General, Karnataka Circle, Bangalore 560001, for recruitment to the post of Postman, Mail Guard and Multi Tasking Staff for the vacancy year 2022, the aapplicant submitted an 3 OA No.442/2022 application for Limited Department Competitive Examination (LDCE) and the applicant was permitted to appear in the said examination held on 04.09.2022. The applicant applicant claims that his name appeared at Sl.No.1107 under SC category in Hassan Postal Division and accordingly participated in the DEST on 23.10.2022 at Postal Training Center, Mysore-570010.
Mysore 570010. It is the grievance of the applicant that suddenly after 9 minutes after the test began began, the keyboard was not working and the applicant could not type further in the system, the same was immediately immediately reported to the Invigilator, but no remedial action was taken. This system failure made the applicant to score less marks. A representation dated 25.10.2022 was submitted before the Respondent No.2 explaining in detail regarding the failure of ssystem and requested to order for re-DEST re DEST and the same has not been responded to, hence this application.
3. Learned Counsel, Shri P.Kamalesan representing the applicant would submit that DEST was scheduled for the applicant from 10.00 am to 11.00 am on 23.10.2022, due to system failure, the applicant could not complete the test. The applicant is aged about 48 years and has scored 72 marks in LDCE held on 04.09.2022 and is qualified subject to the marks obtained in DEST. Due to system failure the 4 OA No.442/2022 applicant nt having not participated in DEST on 23.
23.10.2022 effectively, his chances of selection to the cadre of Postman, Mail Guard would be diminished. The representations made in this regard has not yielded any results. Hence seeks the interference of this Hon Hon'ble Tribunal.
4. We have carefully considered the submissions made by the learned Counsel for the applicant and perused the material on record.
5. Similar issue was considered by this Tribunal in OA No.170/397/2022 dated 26.09.2022. The relevant portion portions of the said order are quoted hereunder here for ready reference.
"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 techn 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 re re-DEST request for return of the test paper from the 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 in the examination control 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 Thus re-DEST cannot be held to be arbitrary and untenable. 5 OA No.442/2022
8. As per the normal procedure prescribed for DEST, a qualifying exam to assess the ability and skill of the candidate, once the 'Start Test' button is clicked 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 providing for conducting re-DEST re DEST for the candidates. In the absence of such Rule ule 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 applican applicant if allowed, would open a Pandora box for the unsuccessful candidates to take the ground of error in the computer system for scoring less marks. The purpose of DEST to test the skill of the candidate having regard to the time period as well, providing re-DEST 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, while rejecting the representation.
representation."
6. In the present case, the applicant contends that the keyboard was not working after 9 minutes of DEST had began, no remedial action was taken by the Room Supervisor (Invigilator). The representation was given in this regard to the Respondent No.2 No.2, the Chief Post Master General on 25.10.2022. No request oor representation was made immediately from the examination centre to know the correctness of the allegation/complaint made by the applicant. If such request or representation ought to be considered by the subsequent 6 OA No.442/2022 date made by the unsuccessful candidates, candidates, it will open a flood gate resulting in multiple dispute unnecessarily w withholding the selection process.. This issue has been elaborately considered in OA No.397/2022 (supra) and same is squarely applicable to the facts of the present case. Hence we we find no ground to entertain the application.
7. In the result, OA stands dismissed. However, it is needless to observe that applicant is at liberty to pursue the matter before the respondents with respect to the representation dated 25.10.2022 in accordance cordance with law, if so advised. No costs.
(RAKESH KUMAR GUPTA) (JUSTICE S.SUJATHA)
MEMBER(A) MEMBER(J)
sd.
7 OA No.442/2022