Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Amitabh Yadav vs M/O Finance on 18 August, 2023
1
OA 1424/2018
53
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
PRINCIPAL BENCH
O.A./1424/2018
New Delhi, this the 18th day of August, 2023
Hon'ble Mr. R.N. Singh, Member (J)
Hon'ble Mr. Sanjeeva Kumar, Member (A)
Amitabh Yadav
S/o Shri Tara Chand Yadav
R/o C-83, Paras Marg,
Siwad Area, Bapu Nagar,
Jaipur, Rajasthan ...Applicant
(Through Ms. Shobha, Advocate)
Versus
1. Union of India
Through its Secretary,
Ministry of Finance,
Department of Revenue
North Block, New Delhi-110001
2. Central Board of Excise and Customs
Through its Chairman
Department of Revenue,
Ministry of Finance, Govt. of India
Ground Floor, Vishala Building,
Bhikaji Cama Place, R.K. Puram
New Delhi
3. Staff Selection Commission,
Through its Chairman,
Block-12, CGO Complex,
Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110003 ... Respondents
(Through Shri Hanu Bhaskar and
Shri Tanmay Vashistha for Ms. Gauraan,
Advocates)
2
OA 1424/2018
53
ORDER (ORAL)
Hon'ble Mr. R.N. Singh, Member (J) The applicant, by way of the present OA filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, has challenged the order dated 18.08.2017 issued by respondent no.2 whereby the representation of the applicant for reallocation of zone was declined. The said decision of respondent no.2 is stated to have been communicated to the applicant through letter dated 4.09.2017 of the authorities under respondent no.2.
2. The applicant is aggrieved of the decision dated 28.09.2017 of respondent no.3 whereby the said respondent has rejected the representation of the applicant allegedly without application of mind. He has prayed for the following reliefs:
"(i) issue appropriate order quashing the impugned order dated 18.08.2017 issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs, Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, Govt. of India;
and/or,
(ii) issue appropriate order quashing the impugned order dated 28.09.2017 passed by the respondent no.3 and/or,
(iii) issue appropriate direction directing the respondents to consider the applicant in the OBC category and allocate Jaipur Cadre from the date of initial joining with all consequential service benefits; and/or, 3 OA 1424/2018 53
(iv) pass any other orders as may be deemed just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case including the costs of this original application."
3. In response to the notice, the respondents have filed counter reply and they have disputed and denied the claim of the applicant and prayed for dismissal of the OA.
4. The applicant has filed rejoinder and has refuted and disputed the claim of the respondents and has reiterated his claim as asserted in the OA.
5. We have heard the learned counsels for the parties and with their assistance have perused the pleadings available on record.
6. The undisputed facts are that in the year 2006, the applicant applied for various posts as an OBC category candidate in response to the advertisement issued by respondent no.3 and submits that the OBC certificate issued to him dated 28.12.2004 was issued by the competent authority. He qualified the written examination as an OBC candidate under the OBC category. In 2007, the applicant found that OBC certificate issued to him on 28.12.2004 was not in the prescribed format and, therefore, he applied for fresh OBC certificate, which was issued to him by the authority concerned on 26.07.2007.
7. In June 2008, interview was held by respondent no.3 when the applicant produced both the OBC certificates i.e. 4 OA 1424/2018 53 one issued on 28.12.2004 and another issued on 26.07.2007 and the respondent no.3 treated the applicant as a General category candidate keeping in view the fact that the subsequent OBC certificate issued to him i.e. one dated 26.07.2007 was issued after the cut-off date prescribed for the selection process.
8. The applicant, in the relevant selection process, secured rank number 1222 and one OBC candidate secured rank of 1480 as evident from the result of the aforesaid examination (Annexure A-1). The name of the applicant appeared at serial number 163 whereas the name of the OBC candidate who secured rank of 1480 appeared at serial number 990 of the said result.
9. As the selection process was dependent upon merit- cum-preference of the candidates, the applicant was allocated Chennai Zone keeping in view his merit in the General category and the OBC candidates, though lower in the relevant merit list, got Jaipur Cadre keeping in view their merit-cum-preference preference under the relevant category. Subsequently, the applicant approached this Tribunal by filing OA No.1758/2010 with prayers including the prayer to direct the respondents to consider his name for the post of Inspector (Central Excise) under OBC category and direct/ensure allocation of Jaipur Cadre for the post of Inspector (Central Excise) to the applicant with all 5 OA 1424/2018 53 consequential benefits from the date his junior in merit was allocated/appointed in Jaipur Cadre. The said OA was disposed of by this Tribunal vide order/judgment dated 12.01.2012 (Annexure A-5) reported in 2012 SCC OnLine CAT 362. Para 3 of the said order dated 12.01.2012 reads as under:
"3. In view of this, OA is disposed of with the following directions to the respondents:-
Since the applicant's claim of belonging to OBC category is not denied by the respondents and as he had already submitted a certificate in the prescribed format before his interview, in all fairness, he should be treated as one belonging to OBC category and made entitled to all the benefits. Now that he has joined on a post in Chennai, it is left to the applicant to make a representation before the competent authority for his Cadre change. If such a representation is received, the competent authority is directed to decide the same in accordance with law by issue of a reasoned and speaking order within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of his representation."
10. The applicant, on his request, has since been granted inter-commissionerate transfer by the competent authority amongst the respondents and thus subsequently joined the post under Jaipur Zone under the respondents 1 and 2. Needless to note that the applicant was initially allocated Chennai Zone treating him to be a General candidate and, on his request, he has been transferred to Jaipur Zone by respondent no.2 as a General candidate placing him at the bottom of the seniority list.
6OA 1424/2018 53
11. The argument of the applicant is that in view of the finding recorded by this Tribunal in the first round of litigation in order dated 12.01.2012 in OA No.1758/2010 about the applicant belonging to OBC category coupled with the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Ram Kumar Gijroya Vs. Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board reported in (2016) 4 SCC 754, the applicant is required to be considered for allocation of cadre treating him to be belonging to OBC category.
12. On the other hand, Shri Hanu Bhaskar, learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that the respondents are not aware as to whether the applicant on being considered to be a candidate of OBC category is likely to get which zone in the aforesaid selection process as per his merit-cum-preference. In this background, he submits that the present OA can be disposed of with direction to respondent no.3 to consider the candidature of the applicant in the aforesaid selection process as a candidate belonging to OBC category and thereafter allocate service/ department/ organization/ zone to him in accordance with his merit-cum-preference under the OBC category with a further direction to the concerned department to grant consequential relief.
7OA 1424/2018 53
13. Learned counsel for the applicant is having no objection if the OA is disposed of in the terms as suggested by the learned counsel for the respondents.
14. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, with the consent of the learned counsels for the parties, the present OA is disposed of with direction:
i) to respondent no.3 to consider the candidature of the applicant as a candidate belonging to OBC in the aforesaid selection process and make recommendation for the relevant service/post/organization/cadre and the zone of such service/cadre keeping in view merit-cum-preference of the applicant treating him belonging to OBC category;
ii) to the concerned department/organization
of respondents no.1 and 2 to give
consequential benefits in terms of
decision/recommendation of respondent
no.3 from the date when the immediate
junior of the applicant in the relevant merit list has got the benefit; and
iii) the aforesaid exercise shall be completed by the respondents as expeditiously as possible and preferably within 12 weeks 8 OA 1424/2018 53 from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
15. The OA stands disposed of with the above directions. No costs.
(Sanjeeva Kumar) (R.N. Singh) Member (A) Member (J) /dkm/