Central Administrative Tribunal - Chandigarh
Sumangal Roy vs Union Of India Through Secretary To ... on 24 January, 2012
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
CHANDIGARH BENCH
O.A. 626/CH/2011 Date of order:- 24.1.2012.
Coram: Honble Mr. Justice S.D.Anand, Member (J).
Honble Mr. Khushiram, Member (A)
1. Sumangal Roy, Assistant Professor in Sculpture, Government College of Art, Chandigarh.
2. NIrmal Parkash, Assistant Professor in Graphics (Printmaking), Government College of Art, Chandigarh.
3. Mrs.Purnima, Assistant Professor in Painting, Government College of Art, Chandigarh.
4. Mrs. Anita Gupta, Assistant Professor in Painting, Government College of Art, Chandigarh.
5. Mrs. Alka Jain, Assistant Professor in Painting, Government College of Art, Chandigarh.
Applicants
(By Advocate : Mr.R.K.Sharma).
Versus
1. Union of India through Secretary to Government of India, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi.
2. Union Public Service Commission, Dholpur House, Shahjehan Road, New Delhi, through its Secretary.
3. All India Council for Technical Education, 7th floor, Chanderlok building, Janpath, New Delhi, through its Member Secretary.
4. Union Territory Chandigarh, Sector 9, Chandigarh through its Administrator.
5. Secretary Technical Education, Chandigarh Administration, Sector 9, Chandigarh.
6. Panjab University, Sector 14, Chandigarh, through its Registrar.
7. Sh. Mahesh Chand Rai, Prajapati, Assistant Professor, Government College of Art, Chandigarh.
8. Sh. Anand Kumar Sharma, Assistant Professor, Government College of Art, Chandigarh.
9. Sh. Parmod Kumar Arya, Assistant Professor, Government College of Art, Chandigarh.
10. Sh. Sanjeev Kumar, Assistant Professor, Government College of Art, Chandigarh.
11. Sh. Rajesh Kumar Sharma, Assistant Professor, Government College of Art, Chandigarh.
Respondents
(By Advocate: Mr.Deepak Agnihotri, for Respondent No.1
Mr.B.B.Sharma, for Respondent No.2.
Mr.Aman Chaudhary, for Respondents No.4 & 5
Mr. S.S.Pathania, for Respondents No.7 to 11.
O R D E R(ORAL).
Honble Mr Justice S.D.Anand, Member (J):
In the course of the O.A, the applicants had applied for the grant of different facets of directions. They had applied for the grant of a direction for the quashment of advertisement dated 11/17.6.2011 (Annexure A-2), issued by the Union Public Service Commission, for recruitment to the post of Principal in the Government College of Art, Chandigarh Administration.
2. It is common ground that this part of the relief has been rendered infructuous in view of the presentation made by the learned counsel representing the UPSC on 24.11.2011 that the recruitment process had been rendered infructuous as none of the candidates was found eligible therefor. That part of the relief applied for has, thus, concededly been rendered infructuous and shall stand disposed of accordingly.
3. The learned counsel for the parties agree that the entire controversy would be solved if the relevant rules formulation comes about within a reasonable time frame because it is then only that the competent authority would be able to invite applications for the relevant appointment. In that context, it is agreed that the relevant rule formulation shall positively come about within six months from today.
4. The applicants propose to file a representation to the competent authority wherein they would make a request for a declaration about equivalence of qualification which should be determinative of eligibility for appointment to the post of Principal.
5. On presentation of that representation, the competent authority shall take a decision thereupon within one month of the filing. The representation would be in respect of the subject indicated as Note 1 at page 7 of the O.A, which is extracted hereunder:-
Note 1 :- Equivalence for Ph.D is based on publication of five international journal papers, each journal having a cumulative impact index of not less than 2.0 with incumbent as the main author and all five publications being in the authors area of specialization.
6. Disposed of accordingly.
(JUSTICE S.D.ANAND) MEMBER (J) (KHUSHIRAM) MEMBER (A) Dated: 24.1.2012.
Kks Draft order in O.A.No. 626/CH/2011 for consideration please.
(KHUSHIRAM), MEMBER(A).
Honble Mr. Justice S.D.Anand, Member(J)/HOD IN THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH.
O.A.No. DATE OF DECISION : __________________ _______________________...Applicant.
________________________ Advocate for the Applicant. Versus Union of India & Ors. .Respondents. _________________________ Advocate for the respondent(s). CORAM: The Honble Mr. _____________________________ The Honble Mr.______________________________
1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not ?
3. Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment?
4. Whether it needs to be circulated to other Benches of the Tribunal ?
6( O.A.NO. 626/CH/2011 ) (O.A.No.626/CH/2011) 1