Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Ms. Priti Pandey vs Delhi Cooperative Housing Finance ... on 27 August, 2012
Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench OA No.2763/2012 New Delhi, this the 27th day of August, 2012 Honble Dr. Veena Chhotray, Member (A) Honble Dr. Dharam Paul Sharma, Member (J) Ms. Priti Pandey, W/o Shri Rakesh Pandey, Working as Stenographer Gr.-I, R/o 89-C, Third Floor, Manohar Kung, Gautam Nagar, New Delhi-110049. Applicant (By Advocate : Shri Susheel Sharma) Versus Delhi Cooperative Housing Finance Corporation Ltd., (DCHFC Ltd.), Through its Managing Director, 3/6 Siri Fort Institutional Area, August Kranti Marg, New Delhi-110049. Respondent. ORDER (ORAL) Dr. Veena Chhotray, Member (A) :
The applicant, presently working as a Stenographer Grade-I under the Delhi Cooperative Housing Finance Corporation Ltd. is aggrieved at non grant of insitu promotions to her from the due date. As per the averments in the OA, the applicant had joined the Organisation as Trainee on a consolidated compensation of Rs.2000.00 in the year 1993 and was put on a regular pay scale (Rs.1640-2900 revised as Rs.5500-9000) at the entry level for a period of five years on the post of Stenographer Grade-I. This was on contractual basis. On completion of five years contractual appointment in the year 1999, he was not granted the insitu promotion, as per the Promotion Policy of the Respondent, but her contract was extended/fresh contract signed at the old pay scale of Rs.5500-9000. On 17.11.2003, the contract of the applicant was further extended for another period of five years, but she was not granted the higher pay scale. In the meanwhile, however, the services of the applicant were regularized w.e.f. 25.7.2005, the next insitu promotion due, as prayed has not been given to her. She also made a detailed representation dated 24.5.2011 (Annex.A-6), but the same has not been responded to so far despite having given a reminder dated 21.10.2011.
2. Shri Susheel Sharma, learned counsel for applicant submits that at present stage, the applicant would be satisfied by issuance of time bound directions to the respondent to consider the case of the applicant for the insitu promotions and pass a reasoned and speaking orders within a definite time framed.
3. In view of the above, we find it appropriate to dispose this OA at the admission stage itself, by directing the Managing Director, DCHFC to consider the representations of the applicant, including the instant OA as a supplementary representation and pass a reasoned and speaking order within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. In case of any grievances on the part of the applicant still subsisting, he would be at liberty to approach this Tribunal for redressal of the same.
The registry is directed to ensure receipt of copy of our order along with coy of this OA with the respondent at the earliest possible.
( Dr.Dharam Paul Sharma ) ( Dr. Veena Chhotray )
Member (J) Member (A)
ravi