Central Administrative Tribunal - Chandigarh
Coram:Hon Ble Mrs.Rajwant Sandhu vs Union Territory on 4 March, 2014
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH OA. 352/CH/2013 (Reserved on 14.2.2014) Chandigarh, this the 04th day of March, 2014 CORAM:HONBLE MRS.RAJWANT SANDHU,MEMBER(A) HONBLE DR. BRAHM A.AGRAWAL,MEMBER(J) Ashok Kumar aged 23 years, son of Sh. Bhanwar Lal Sain, resident of Village and Post Office, Juliasar Via Jajod, Tehsil Laxmangarh, District Sikar, Rajasthan-332318 .Applicant BY ADVOCATE: MR. DAVINDER LUBANA VERSUS 1.Union Territory , Chandigarh Administration through its Secretary, Medical Education and Research, UT Secretariat, Sector 9, Chandigarh. 2.Government Medical College and Hospital, Sector 32, Chandigarh, through its Director Principal. ..Respondents BY ADVOCATE: MR. VIVEK ARORA ORDER
HONBLE MRS. RAJWANT SANDHU, MEMBER(A):-
1. This OA has been filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, seeking the following relief:-
(i) Direct the respondents to issue appointment letter to the applicant under OBC Category with all consequential benefits.
2. The applicant is aggrieved by the decision of the respondent Department in not giving him appointment letter as Staff Nurse under the OBC Category although he had been selected as such. The applicant had furnished certificate regarding belonging to Nai caste, but the respondents had taken the stand that Nai caste is not recognized under the Notification regarding OBCs issued by the Chandigarh Administration and Central List issued by the Government of India. The respondents issued a letter that the applicant had to show himself as Hazam Nai/Hajjam Nai by 18.03.2013; otherwise, his candidature would be rejected in the OBC category (Annexure A-17).
3. In the grounds for relief, it is stated that caste of the applicant Nai was duly recognized by the Chandigarh Administration and Government of India as per Notifications at Annexures A-13 and A-14. Moreover, the Chandigarh Administration was issuing OBC certificates mentioning Caste Nai and copies of Certificates dated 2.11.2000 in favor of one Sh. Baljeet Singh and 30.4.2007 in favour of one Sh. Jitender have been annexed as Annexures A-15 andA-16 respectively.
4. In the written statement filed on behalf of the respondents, it has been stated that as per letter issued by the Joint Secretary Personnel, Chandigarh Administration, vide No. 27/4/94-IH(7)-2003/23827 dated 23.12.2003 (Annexure R-I), the benefit of reservation to OBC category would be extended on the pattern of the Central Government, wherein the OBC would have to be included in the Central List and the Union Territory Chandigarh List. The respondent No. 2 on 21.9.2012 issued Corrigendum (Annexure R-II) wherein it was clearly mentioned that the definition of OBC in UT Chandigarh is that the caste of OBC should be reflected in both Central List as well as UT List. According to these instructions, there is no doubt that the caste of Nai fall at Sr. No. 28 in the Central List meant for UT Chandigarh, but in UT (Chandigarh) OBC List (Annexure R-III), it has been mentioned as Nais at Sr. No. 19. Further, as Sr. No. 39 of the UT (Chandigarh) List, it has been mentioned as Hazam Nai/Hajjam Nai. It was decided in the meeting held on 21.11.2012 (Annexure R-IV) with the representative of Department of Social Welfare, UT Chandigarh that only those OBC candidates are to be given benefit of reservation under OBC Category whose caste is specifically mentioned in OBC list of UT Chandigarh and Central List of OBC meant for UT Chandigarh. It was further conveyed in the said meeting that the caste strictly as per spelling mentioned in both UT and Central List are to be given the benefit of reservation under OBC category, while making the appointments in UT Chandigarh including GMCH-32 and GMCH-16 Chandigarh. Only the caste as mentioned in the UT and Central List of OBC meant for UT Chandigarh is to be considered. Synonymous and sub castes of the caste mentioned in the UT and Central list of OBC meant for UT Chandigarh are not to be considered. On rechecking of the application of the applicant, it was revealed that he belongs to caste Nai and not Nais (Sr. No. 19) and Hazam Nai/Hajjam Nai (Sr. No. 39) of UT (Chandigarh) OBC list and Hazam/Hajjam Nai (Sr. No. 28) of the Central OBC List meant for UT Chandigarh. Accordingly, the applicant Mr. Ashok Kumar (Roll No. 20362) was informed vide this office letter No. 5819 dated 19.2.2013 (Annexure R-V) that on scrutiny of his application, it reveals from his OBC certificate that he belong to caste Nai-57. As per Chandigarh UT OBC list (Sr. No. 39) and Central OBC list (Sr. No. 28), the benefit of reservation in OBC category is to be given to Hazam Nai/Hajjam Nai. Accordingly, the applicant was requested to submit fresh OBC caste certificate indicating specifically that Hazam Nai/Hajjam Nai for establishing his eligibility under OBC category by 18.3.2013 positively failing which his candidature will be rejected in OBC category. The applicant has not submitted the fresh OBC certificate so far. Clarification was also sought from the Director Social Welfare, UT Chandigarh that as to whether the candidates belonging to Nai without mentioning Hazam Nai/Hajjam Nai or Nais are to be considered in OBC category or not. In this regard, a meeting was also convened with the representative of Director Social Welfare, Chandigarh on 27.6.2013 and, minutes of the meeting have been recorded (Annexure R-VIII). It was decided that candidates not having caste as mentioned in OBC list of Chandigarh Administration and central list of OBC for UT Chandigarh would not be considered for the post under OBC category. Accordingly, the case of applicant claiming reservation under OBC category on the basis of his caste Nai is not maintainable since it is against the policy of UT Administration vide Annexure R-1.
5. Arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties were heard. Learned counsel for the applicant stated the background of the matter and referred to the Notification at Annexure A-13 dated 27.6.1995 through which the list of castes defined as Other Backward Classes (OBCs) for UT Chandigarh was published. At Sr. No. 19, the entry is Nais. At Sr. No. 39, there was another entry Hazam Nai/Hajjam Nai. Annexure A-14 was the list of OBCs in the Hindi language and in the same, the entry at Sr. No. 19 is ???. Learned counsel also referred to the certificate No. SDM/20/3030 dated 2.11.2000 issued in favour of one Sh. Ajay which states that he belongs to the Nai community which is recognized as Backward Class under the Government of India, Ministry of Welfare Resolution No. 12011/6893-BCC(C) dated 10.9.1993. Another Certificate referred to is that issued to Sh. Jitender vide Certificate No. SDM/20/406 dated 30.4.2007 which again mentions that the applicant belongs to the Nai caste which is recognized as a Backward Class under Government of India, Ministry of Welfare Resolution No. 12011/6893-BCC(C) dated 10.9.1993. Hence, the applicant was also entitled to be treated as an OBC candidate.
6. Learned counsel for the respondents referred to letter No. 27/4/94-IH(7)-2003/23827 dated 23.12.2003 (Annexure R-1) wherein it had been clarified that the benefit of reservation to OBCs would be extended on the pattern of Central Government wherein the OBCs would have to be as included in the Central List and UT Chandigarh List. He also stated that Corrigendum was further issued on 27.9.2012 (Annexure R-2) again clarifying as follows:-
In order to correct this discrepancy, only the OBC candidates (who fall in UT as well as Central list) shall be considered on the basis of their merit in the OBC category. The candidates who had applied under OBC category but are not covered under the UT as well as central list would be considered in the general category according to merit. He stated that in the Notification, the spelling required was Nais while the applicants Certificate mentioned Nai.
7. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the matter and perused the material on record. It is evident from the material on record that although the English Version of the Notification dated 27.6.1995 published in the Chandigarh Administration Gazette has the entry at Sr. No. 19 as Nais, but in the Hindi version, it reads as ???. Moreover, from the certificates being issued by the SDM Chandigarh Administration, it is evident that Nai is being treated as a Backward Class in the UT Chandigarh. Hence, the Certificate of the applicant regarding his eligibility to be considered as an OBC candidate appears to have been wrongly rejected. The respondents may re-consider the matter in the light of the findings above and issue appointment letter to the applicant as Staff Nurse under OBC category if he is otherwise eligible for such appointment. Action in this regard may be completed within one month of a certified copy of this order being served upon the respondents.
8. This OA stands allowed in the above terms. No costs.
(RAJWANT SANDHU)
MEMBER(A)
(DR. BRAHM A.AGRAWAL)
MEMBER(J)
Dated: March 04th, 2014.
ND*