Gujarat High Court
Kureshi Muzaffar Husen Mayuddin vs Union Of India on 12 October, 2021
Author: A. P. Thaker
Bench: N.V.Anjaria, A. P. Thaker
C/SCA/15122/2021 ORDER DATED: 12/10/2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 15122 of 2021
================================================================
KURESHI MUZAFFAR HUSEN MAYUDDIN
Versus
UNION OF INDIA
================================================================
Appearance:
MR ANAND L SHARMA(1714) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,2,3
for the Respondent(s) No. 1,10,11,12,13,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9
================================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA
and
HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A. P. THAKER
Date : 12/10/2021
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A. P. THAKER)
1. Heard learned advocate Mr.A.L.Sharma for the petitioner.
2. By way of filing present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have prayed as under:-
"(A). Your Lordships may be pleased to issue writ or certiorari or any other writ, order or direction in the nature of writ, quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated 09-06-2021 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench, Ahmedabad in Original Application No.251/2017, being contrary to settled legal position.
(B) Be pleased to allow the Original Application No.251/2017 while directing respondent authorities to grant all consequential benefits such as arrears of pay, seniority etc from the date the first selected candidate joined the duty.Page 1 of 8 Downloaded on : Sun Jan 16 23:24:03 IST 2022
C/SCA/15122/2021 ORDER DATED: 12/10/2021 (C) Be pleased to allow this petition with costs and be pleased to quantify the cost in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case.
(D) Be pleased to grant such other and further reliefs as may be deemed just and proper by the Hon'ble Court in the facts and circumstances of this case."
3. The petitioners have challenged the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench, Ahmedabad, passed on 9.6.2021 in Original Application No.251 of 2017, whereby the Original Application filed by the petitioners came to be dismissed.
4. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioners have applied for the post of Technician 'B' Electronics Trade pursuant to the advertisement dated 03.12.2013 issued by respondent no.3. That they have successfully passed written examination with higher marks and also faced oral interview, trade test. It is contended that the candidates are required to produce original documents and accordingly they have also produced the same as per the version of the petitioners. Respondent no.3 published result of interview for the said post on 10.6.2021 and petitioner no.1 was shown in waiting list at serial no.5 in General Category, petitioner no.2 was shown in waiting list at serial no.3 in OBC category, and petitioner no.3 was shown in waiting list at serial no.6 in General Category. It is also averred that respondent no.3 has mentioned that the waiting list would be valid upto 22.2.2017 only.
Page 2 of 8 Downloaded on : Sun Jan 16 23:24:03 IST 2022C/SCA/15122/2021 ORDER DATED: 12/10/2021 4.1 It is averred by the petitioners that since waiting list was not operated they made representation before the concerned authority and they came to know that the candidates, who were not holding the required qualifications, as per the advertisement, were offered appointment by respondent no.3. The grievance of the petitioners is that though at the relevant time qualification of Certificate in ITI Trade in Radio and TV Mechanic was not prescribed for the post of Technician (B) (Electronics), respondent no.3 has appointed the private respondents. It is also contended that the exercise undertaken by the selection committee as well as appointment of the private respondents on the post of Technician 'B' (Electronics) (herein after referred to as "said post") and the action of the official respondents is illegal and the selection and appointment of private respondents is illegal. On that basis, they have preferred aforesaid Original Application for declaring the appointment of the private respondents as illegal and arbitrary and to quash and set aside the same and to direct respondent no.3 to operate the waiting list and to appoint the petitioners on the post of Technician 'B' (Electronics).
4.2 The petitioners have approached Central Administrative Tribunal by way of filing Original Application No.251 of 2017, which came to be disposed of on 9.6.2021 by the Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ahmedabad, ultimately dismissing the application. Said judgment has been assailed by the petitioners.
5. Learned advocate Mr.Sharma for the appellants has vehemently assailed the said order on the grounds narrated in the appeal memo and has submitted that the Tribunal has Page 3 of 8 Downloaded on : Sun Jan 16 23:24:03 IST 2022 C/SCA/15122/2021 ORDER DATED: 12/10/2021 misdirected itself in observing that the controversy in the matter is in narrow compass as to whether the petitioners have any indefeasible right in operating the waiting list. According to him, the main question is as to whether the private respondents, who were selected and appointed, are possessing requisite qualifications as per the advertisement. He has also contended that in the advertisement there was no qualification prescribed for inclusion of Certificate in ITI Trade in Radio and TV Mechanic. While referring to annexure-B, page 39, which is advertisement No.SAC:04/2013 especially in respect of the post of Technician 'B' 'Electronics', he has submitted that there was no prescription made in the essential qualification. According to him, said Radio Mechanic cannot be treated as an Electronic Trade Group. He has vehemently submitted that the Tribunal has failed to consider the fact that there was never the contention of the petitioners that the respondents be called upon to operate the wait list but, according to him, the controversy involved in the case was that the official respondent committed irregularity during screening process by considering the cases of private respondents, who were ineligible candidates and the screening committee has no power to extend the zone of consideration at a later stage of screening, which they did by considering private respondents.
5.1 Mr.Sharma vehemently submitted that the issue was never of equivalence or that a Electronics Mechanic Radio and TV would be able to perform the job requirement prescribed in the advertisement. According to him, there is no stipulation in the advertisement that ITI in Electronics Group or Trade but it is only single trade Electronics Mechanic, which restrict to Page 4 of 8 Downloaded on : Sun Jan 16 23:24:03 IST 2022 C/SCA/15122/2021 ORDER DATED: 12/10/2021 alone or concern or respective Electronics Mechanic Trade in ITI. Mr.Sharma also submitted that private respondents have no eligibility to be considered for the post in question. He has also submitted that learned Tribunal has committed serious error of facts and law in dismissing the Original Application. He has submitted that ISRO Center at Bangalore has not allowed to attend the skill test after verifying educational qualification of Certificate of ITI for the post of Mechanic 'B' Electronics and made them ineligible for the same. He has submitted that in view of these facts, the Ahmedabad Office ought to have also rejected the candidature of private respondents and ought not to have appointed them and would have operated the waiting list in favour of the petitioners. He has prayed to allow the petition by setting aside the impugned order of the learned Tribunal.
6. Having considered the submissions made on behalf of the petitioners by learned advocate Mr.Sharma and having considered the material on record coupled with the order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench, on 9.6.2021 in Original Application No.251 of 2017, it transpires that it is undisputed fact that pursuant to the advertisement issued by respondent no.3 for the post in question, the petitioners have applied and their names have been included in the wait list. It is also undisputed fact that the private respondents have been selected and appointed by the respondent no.3 after due process. The main grievance of the petitioners herein is regarding inclusion of private respondents on the basis of their having Certificate of ITI Trade in Radio and TV and Mechanic for the post in question.
Page 5 of 8 Downloaded on : Sun Jan 16 23:24:03 IST 2022C/SCA/15122/2021 ORDER DATED: 12/10/2021
7. On perusal of the impugned order of the Tribunal, it transpires that while dealing with the contentions of the petitioners herein, which have been raised herein above, learned Tribunal has considered both the aspects in detail, in paragraphs 9 and 11 as under:-
"9. The main grievance raised by the applicants was that respondent no.3 and its Screening Committee had changed the terms of advertisement, by considering the certificate of Mechanic Radio & TV as equivalent qualification of the Trade Certificate or Electronic Mechanical. Applicants also contended that the respondent illegally appointed the private respondent no.4 to 13 as technician 'B' Electronics who possessed the certificate of Mechanic Radio & TV. Against it, the respondents denied the submission of applicants mainly on the ground that in the online registration form, candidates who had applied against the Post Code:1, i.e. Technician 'B' Electronics, necessarily had to click the options available for entering their educational qualification. Both "Electronic Mechanics" and "Mechanical Radio & TV" options were made available in the online registration form, as both the trades were listed in the same group, i.e. "Electronics". Therefore, the Screening Committee had followed the correct procedure and terms of the advertisement and recommended the names of successful candidates. Since the applicants' names were placed in waiting list and the said list had expired, the applicants did not have any indefeasible right to claim the appointment.
.......
11. As noted hereinabove, the candidates were given two options when they clicked the column "Discipline"
under the head "Educational Information" viz. Electronics Mechanics or Electronic Radio * TV (Ann. R/2 refer). As per the said format, the candidates possessing the Trade Page 6 of 8 Downloaded on : Sun Jan 16 23:24:03 IST 2022 C/SCA/15122/2021 ORDER DATED: 12/10/2021 Certificate in Electronics Mechanic Radio & TV can also apply for the post of Technician 'B' Electronics. Accordingly, the private respondents who possessed the qualification of ITI (NCVT) in Mechanic Radio & TV (MRTV) had also applied for the post of Technician 'B' Electronics."
7.1 Further regarding inclusion of the candidates having Electronic Mechanics and Mechanic Radio and TV qualification, the Tribunal has specifically observed as follows in paragraph 13:-
"13. It is noticed that Electronic Mechanics & Mechanic Radio & TV are grouped under one Trade Group, i.e., "Group No.23-Electronics Trade Group", as per Schedule- I, Rule 3 (1) and Rule 7 (1) of Apprenticeship rules, 1992. (Ann.R/4). Further, the Directorate General of Employment and Training (DGET) vide its letter dated 17.02.1984 (Ann.R/5) had also clarified the equivalency of various disciplines under restructure pattern of craftsman training scheme and rebate in training period under apprenticeship training scheme including the streams of Electrical/ Electronic Trade Groups wherein Mechanic Radio & TV and Electronics Mechanics are grouped under Electronics Trade and considered as equal. It is also noticed that the Dy. Director General of Training / Member Secretary, NCVT, M/O Labour and Employment DGE&T vide its letter dated 02.06.2008 (Ann.R/3) issued clarifications to the effect that in the Trade Group of "Electronics" the Trade of "Radio & TV Mechanics" is also included. National Council for Vocational Training (NCVT) has awarded National Apprenticeship Certificate in Electronic Mechanic Trade to those candidates who have passed their National Trade Certificate in Mechanic Radio & TV Trade."Page 7 of 8 Downloaded on : Sun Jan 16 23:24:03 IST 2022
C/SCA/15122/2021 ORDER DATED: 12/10/2021 7.2 Thus, learned Tribunal has considered the factual as well as legal aspects in detail and has also observed and come to the conclusion that screening committee is an expert committee and in view of decision of the Apex Court in UPSC v. M. Sathiya Priya, (2018) 15 SCC 796, has held that their recommendation of the eligible candidates cannot be said to be illegal. Entire process has been held to be legal one. It also appears from the impugned order that the petitioners have also sought for direction to respondent no.3 to operate the waiting list and appoint the applicants on the post of Technician 'B' Electronics. Thus, while challenging the appointment of the private respondents on the post, the petitioners have also sought for relief of their appointment by operating waiting list. Thus, essentially the prayer by the petitioners was for operation of the waiting list while discarding the candidature and selection of the private respondents.
8. The observations and conclusion reached by the Tribunal cannot be termed as error of facts or law and it does not require interference. Hence, present petition is devoid of merits and same is summarily dismissed.
(N.V.ANJARIA, J) (DR. A. P. THAKER, J) R.S. MALEK Page 8 of 8 Downloaded on : Sun Jan 16 23:24:03 IST 2022