Karnataka High Court
Union Of India vs Shri. Ravi D. Ankolekar on 21 March, 2019
Author: G.Narendar
Bench: G.Narendar
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF MARCH 2019
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.NARENDAR
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BELLUNKE A.S.
WRIT PETITION NO.101906/2018 (S-CAT)
BETWEEN
1. UNION OF INDIA
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY,
MINISTRY OF DEFENCE,
SENA BHAVAN,
SOUTH BLOCK,
NEW DELHI-110001.
2. FLAG OFFICER COMMANDING-IN-CHIEF,
HEADQUARTERS,
WESTERN NAVAL COMMAND,
SAHID BHAGAT SINGH ROAD,
MUMBAI-400001.
3. COMMAND CIVILLIAN PERSONNEL OFFICER (CCPO)
HEADQUARTERS, WESTERN NAVALL COMMAND,
WESTERN NAVALL COMMAND,
SAHID BHAGAT SINGH ROAD,
MUMBAI-400001.
4. FLAG OFFICE COMMANDING,
HEADQUARTERS,
KARNATAKA NAVAL AREA,
NAVAL BASE,
KARWAR-581308.
-2-
5. STAFF OFFICER (CIVILIAN)
HEADQUARTERS,
KARNATAKA NAVAL AREA,
NAVAL BASE,
KARWAR-581308,
(U.K. DISTRICT)
6. COMMONDORE SUPERINTENDENT,
NAVAL SHIP REPAIR YARD,
NAVAL BASE,
KARWAR-581308.
..... PETITIONERS
(BY SRI M B KANAVI, ADV.)
AND
SHRI. RAVI D. ANKOLEKAR,
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
S/O SHRI.DINGA ANKOLEKAR,
R/AT: MUDGA, AMDALLI-581324,
KARWAR TALUK,
DIST: UTTARA KANNADA (U.K.)
..... RESPONDENT
(BY SRI F V PATIL, ADV. FOR C/R)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
QUASH THE ORDER DATED 03.01.2018 PASED BY THE
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE,
BENCH IN OA NO.170/00084/2017 PRODUCED AT
ANNEXURE-A.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, G.NARENDAR J. MADE THE
FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the respondent.
-3-
2. The petitioner/Union of India is before this Court being aggrieved by the order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Bengaluru Bench, Bengaluru in O.A.No.170/00084/2017 dated 03.01.2018.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners would contend that the order impugned is devoid of reasons and that application has been disposed off by a one paragraph order and hence, he would pray that the same warrants interference at the hands of this Court.
4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent would contend that respondent had put in 14 years' service in Navy and that he possesses all criteria as stipulated in the notification published in the Employment News dated 20-26.08.2013.
5. The post applied for by the respondent is listed at Sl.No.8 and the post is Master Grade-II. The qualifications stipulated therein are a) Matriculation or equivalent from a recognized Board b) Certificate of -4- Master second Class-I and V c) At least two years of experience independently handling of a craft 20 nominal horsepower. Age limit is 18 years to 40 years and thereafter pay scale is stipulated therein.
6. It is the case of the petitioners that the respondent could not have obtained the certificate certifying him as competent to handle the Vessel. The certificate produced at Annexure-R3, is dated 14.01.2015 and is issued by the Government of West Bengal, certifying that he is competent and duly qualified to fulfill the duties of Second Class Master of an Inland Vessel having engine capacity of 30/40 nominal horsepower, or upwards, but less than 80/100 nominal horsepower and is issued on 23.02.2015. Suspecting the authenticity of the same, the Staff Officer (Civilian) and Flag Officer, Head Quarters, Karnataka Naval Area, Naval Base, Karwar- 581308, requested for authentication of the said certificate. In reply, the Government of India, Ministry of Shipping, Mercantile Marine Department, -5- Kolkata State, by letter dated 23.12.2014 has intimated the recipient of the said communication, that the certificate issued is valid and thereby authenticated the certificated placed on record by the respondent.
7. We have perused the impugned order to state the least, it is shocking that the authority has passed one line cryptic order whereby the respondent has been merely intimated that he does not fulfill the eligibility criteria. We are unable to comprehend the reasons behind such a cryptic order. No reasons are assigned. No ground is made out. The factum of authentication of the certificate is also not taken into consideration. That apart, the fact remains that the respondent who had applied has been interviewed and also found physically fit and thereafter he has been placed as a reserve in the selection list. All these facts are not denied. That being the case, the respondent was vested with a semblance of right by having successfully completed the selection procedure, it was incumbent and imperative for the respondents to have -6- assigned a valid reason for rejecting his application that too after having intimated him that he is successfully qualified to be appointed to the post.
8. The action of the petitioners is a gross violation of the principles of natural justice. A minimum of a notice at least, was required of the petitioners. The petitioners having announced that the petitioners had successfully completed selection process, ought to have put him a notice with regard to any adverse finding against him. Even otherwise, the enquiry conducted behind the back of the respondent has also not proved detrimental, on the other hand, the authorities have authenticated the certificate issued holding him competent to drive a vessel fitted with an engine of a particular horsepower.
9. In that view of the matter, though the order impugned is cryptic and leaves much to desire the same yardstick applies to the order passed by the petitioners also. It is seen that the post has been advertised in -7- 2014, more than five years have passed-by, only on account of the litigation before the Courts. In that view of the matter, the order dated 18.02.2016 canceling the candidature of the respondent cannot be justified in any circumstances or any ground whatsoever. Hence, the writ petition stands dismissed.
The petitioners shall expedite the process of consideration of the respondent to the applied post and complete the same within six weeks from the date of receipt of this order.
Sd/-
JUDGE Sd/-
JUDGE Naa