Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Delhi Planning And Statistical ... vs Govt. Of Nctd on 14 May, 2026
Item No.77/C-4 O.A. No.2463/2021
Central Administrative Tribunal
Principal Bench, New Delhi
O.A. No.2463/2021
Reserved on: 02.04.2026
Pronounced on: 14.05.2026
Hon'ble Mr. Manish Garg, Member (J)
Hon'ble Dr. Anand S Khati, Member (A)
1. DELHI PLANNING AND STATISTICAL
SERVICES ASSOCIATION THROUGH ITS
PRESIDENT MR. THAKUR DAYAL REGISTERED
OFFICE AT:-HOUSE
AT: NO: AG-617,
617, GROUND
FLOOR, SHALIMAR BAGH, DELHI
DELHI-110088
PRESENTLY POSTED/WORKING AS
STATISTICAL OFFICER IN THE PLA
PLANNING
DEPARTMENT GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI, AT 7/9
UNDER HILL ROAD, DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT, CIVIL LINE, NEW DELHI.
2. MR. SACHIL KUMAR YADAV C/O SH.
VIRENDRA SINGH YADAV RESIDENT OF RZ
27.7M (OLD PLOT NO.36), GALI NO.6 PALAM
COLONY, KHASRA NO.-51/6/1,
NO. 51/6/1, RAJ NAG
NAGAR PART-
2, DELHI-110077.
DELHI 110077. PRESENTLY WORKING AS
ASSISTANT DIRECTOR (ON DEPUTATION) AT
ADMINISTRATIVE REFORMS DEPARTMENT,
GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI, AT DELHI
SECRETARIATE, IP ESTATE, NEW DELHIDELHI-110002
...Applicant
(By Advocate: Mr. Akhilesh Kumar Pandey)
Versus
1. PLANNING
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
THROUGH PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
(PLANNING) (GOVT. OF NCT OF
DELHI) 4TH FLOOR, DELHI
SACHIVALYA, IP ESTATE, DELHI.
2. GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI THROUGH
Page 1 of 23
SURAJ BISHT
Item No.77/C-4 O.A. No.2463/2021
CHIEF SECTRETARY 5TH LEVEL, A
A-
WING, DELHI SECRETARIAT NEW
DELHI
3. UNION PUBLIC SERVICE
COMMISSION THROUGH THE
CHAIRMAN DHOLPUR HOUSE,
SHAH JAHAN ROAD, NEW DELHI
4. MINISTRY OF FINANCE,
DEPARTMENT OF EXPENDITURE
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA THROUGH
ITS SECRETARY NORTH BLOCK,
NEW DELHI
...Respondents
(By Advocate: Mr. Amit Anand)
Page 2 of 23
SURAJ BISHT
Item No.77/C-4 O.A. No.2463/2021
ORDER
Hon'ble Mr. Manish Garg, Member (J) In the present Original Application, filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, the applicants have prayed for the following reliefs:
"(A) Quash/set aside the vacancies of 35 posts of Statistical Officers, published vide Advt. No. 15/2020 at Sr. No. 02 dated 28.11.2020 by the respondent no.3 and proceeding resulte resulted therefrom.
(B) Issue direction to the Respondent no.1 and 2 to expedite reorganizing & restructuring of Planning & Statistical Cadre, GNCTD.
(C) Costs of this application may also be granted to the applicants;
(D) Pass any such other or further order(s) order(s), which this Hon'ble Tribunal deem fit and proper in the interest of justice."
2. Highlighting the facts of the case, learned counsel for the applicants submitted that in the year 2013, vide Advertisement No.13/2013, Respondent No.3 invited Online Recruitm Recruitment Applications for 20 posts of Statistical Officer in the Planning Department, Government of NCT of Delhi. However, all the said 20 posts were subsequently withdrawn by the Planning Department for reasons best known to it. Thereafter, in the year 2014, vvide Advertisement No.18/2014, Respondent No.3 again invited applications for 21 posts of Statistical Officer, which too were withdrawn by the Planning Department without disclosed reasons. It is stated that eligible in-service in service Statistical Assistants had ap applied and Page 3 of 23 SURAJ BISHT Item No.77/C-4 O.A. No.2463/2021 were even issued interview calls on both occasions, but due to lapses on the part of Respondent No.1, both advertisements were withdrawn, depriving them of promotion opportunities. The posts in question had been lying vacant since 2010, and in te terms of Office Memorandum No.7(1) E.Coord-I/2017 E.Coord I/2017 dated 12.04.2017 issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Expenditure, all posts remaining vacant for more than two years are deemed abolished unless specifically exempted, and ca cannot be filled without prior revival. Despite this, no steps were taken by Respondent No.1 to fill or revive the posts in accordance with the Recruitment Rules and applicable Office Memoranda. After withdrawing the posts in 2013 and 2014, Respondent No.1 nneither initiated fresh recruitment nor obtained formal revival of the posts. It is further averred that verbal assurances were repeatedly given to Statistical Assistants regarding cadre restructuring and a proposal for 100% promotion to the post of Statist Statistical Officer under the chairmanship of Sh. S.N. Sahai. However, contrary to such assurances, Respondent No.3 issued Advertisement No.15/2020 at S. No.02 for 35 posts of Statistical Officer. These vacancies, stated to be lying vacant since 2010, were allegedly allegedly already deemed abolished under the Office Memorandum dated 12.04.2017, and were advertised without obtaining mandatory revival, purportedly with mala fide intent to deny promotional rights to eligible Statistical Assistants. The said Advertisement No.1 No.15/2020 is thus claimed to be Page 4 of 23 SURAJ BISHT Item No.77/C-4 O.A. No.2463/2021 void ab initio as most of the 35 posts fall under the category of deemed abolished posts. It is further submitted that the vacancies had accumulated since 2010, and following the withdrawals in 2013 and 2014, the posts exceeded the two-year year vacancy period, thereby attracting deemed abolition. Despite this, Respondent No.1 sent requisition for 35 posts to Respondent No.3 without revival, in violation of applicable rules. It is also contended that due to such actions and prolonged stagnation of over 10 10-15 years, many Statistical Assistants were deprived of promotion and even the opportunity to apply through direct recruitment due to age constraints. He further submits that an RTI response revealed that the advertised vacancies pertained pertained to the year 2020 and were stated to be existing and not abolished. However, the learned counsel for the applicant contends this to be false, asserting that the vacancies actually pertain to the period since 2010 and stood abolished under the applicable applicable rules. He further submits that as per Recruitment Rules, 75% of posts are to be filled by promotion and 25% by direct recruitment, indicating that the advertised posts were not genuinely from the year 2020. The Petitioner Association submitted a representation ntation dated 24.06.2021 seeking withdrawal of Advertisement No.15/2020, which was rejected without assigning reasons, and further representations dated 28.06.2021 by individual Statistical Assistants were also similarly rejected by the respondents. Subsequently, uently, the Commission proceeded to conduct an offline pen Page 5 of 23 SURAJ BISHT Item No.77/C-4 O.A. No.2463/2021 and paper based Combined Recruitment Test for short short-listing candidates for the said posts on 19.09.2021. Learned counsel for the applicant has drawn our attention to the RTI reply filed by the respondent ondent no.1 (Annex.A6), which reads as under:
"Q.1 The vacancies of the Statical Officer posts which are advertised pertains to which year ? Year wise Vacancy Chart may please be provided.
Ans. The Vacancies pertains to the year 2020.
Q.2 Please informs those those advertised posts includes any posts which have been lying vacant for more than 2 years?
Q.3 If yes please provide information such posts regarding such posts have been got revived from the various competent Departments as prescribed in the procedure la laid down by DOPT guidelines before sending it to UPSC.
Ans. 2&3 All the advertised posts still exists and have not been abolished by various Departments of GNCTD as on date."
3. Opposing the grant of relief, learned counsel for the respondents submits that att present, there are 159 sanctioned posts of Statistical Officers (SOs) in various departments of the Government of NCT of Delhi, and as per the existing Recruitment Rules, 75% of these posts are to be filled by promotion while 25%, i.e., 39 posts, are earmarked armarked for Direct Recruitment through UPSC. During the year 2013, the Planning Department requested UPSC vide letter dated 05.08.2013 to fill up 20 posts of Statistical Officers under the Direct Recruitment quota pursuant to Advertisement No.13/2013; how however, the requisition was withdrawn on the advice of UPSC vide letter dated 22.08.2014, wherein UPSC advised that it would be appropriate Page 6 of 23 SURAJ BISHT Item No.77/C-4 O.A. No.2463/2021 to withdraw the requisition as it was based on old Recruitment Rules dated 24.07.2008, which had been superseded by re revised Recruitment Rules dated 03.09.2013. Subsequently, a fresh requisition for 21 vacancies of Statistical Officer, including 4 posts reserved for OBC candidates, was forwarded to UPSC vide letter dated 09.09.2014 for direct recruitment, and these vacanci vacancies were advertised vide Advertisement No.18/2014; however, UPSC kept the recruitment process on hold due to the need for clarity regarding the reservation policy of GNCTD for OBC candidates. Thereafter, UPSC vide letter dated 24.08.2016 stated that since the the opinion of the Ministry of Home Affairs on the issue of reservation for OBC category had not been received, no decision had been taken regarding consideration of candidates belonging to OBC category from other States/UTs against vacancies reserved for OBC OBC category in recruitment proposals pertaining to GNCTD, and consequently, all such recruitment processes, including the present case, were kept on hold. It is stated that the withdrawal of the requisition was necessitated due to interpretation issues relating relating to the OBC reservation policy of GNCTD and was not attributable to any fault of the Cadre Controlling Department. Further, the Planning Department vide letter dated 08.11.2016 and reminder dated 04.01.2017 requested UPSC to clarify whether recruitment recruitment could be initiated for 17 posts of Statistical Officers by keeping 4 OBC posts in abeyance; however, UPSC vide letter dated 07.02.2017 informed that the recruitment Page 7 of 23 SURAJ BISHT Item No.77/C-4 O.A. No.2463/2021 process had been cancelled and that a fresh requisition may be submitted by the department.
department. Thereafter, the department took up the matter with the Services Department, GNCTD vide letters dated 22.10.2019, 07.11.2019 and 06.12.2019 for early resolution of the OBC reservation issue, which was eventually resolved by the Services Department vide Circular Circular dated 12.03.2020. Following this, the answering Respondent sent a requisition to UPSC vide letter dated 16.07.2020 for filling up 35 vacancies of Statistical Officer through direct recruitment after approval of the competent authority, and UPSC accordingly accordingly advertised the vacancies vide Advertisement No.15/2020, with the recruitment process being undertaken through open market selection. It is further submitted that the representation dated 24.06.2021 made by the Delhi Planning & Statistical Services Association (DPSSA) seeking withdrawal of the requisition for 35 vacant posts advertised under Advertisement No.15/2020 dated 28.11.2020 was not accepted by the Competent Authority. UPSC conducted the written test on 19.09.2021 and declared the results on 25.10.2021, and the final stage of recruitment, i.e., interviews, was expected to be conducted shortly thereafter. The said representation was submitted by Thakur Dayal, President of the Association, requesting withdrawal of the requisition and cancellati cancellation of the advertisement; however, the claim was found to be contrary to the Recruitment Rules, which clearly provide for 75% posts by promotion and 25% by direct recruitment, and since the 35 posts Page 8 of 23 SURAJ BISHT Item No.77/C-4 O.A. No.2463/2021 advertised fall within the direct recruitment quota as per the Recruitment Rules, the representation dated 24.06.2021 was rejected by the Competent Authority and the decision was duly communicated. It is also stated that the proposal for reorganization and restructuring of the Planning and Statistical Cadre of GN GNCTD is under consideration. Further, the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, has requested the Government of NCT of Delhi to defend the matter on behalf of the Ministry of Finance, Department of Expenditure. It is lastly submitted that even if, hypothetically, the claim of the applicants seeking withdrawal of the direct recruitment of 35 posts through UPSC is accepted, the remaining posts falling within the 25% direct recruitment quota would still necessarily have to be filled through UPSC in acc accordance with the existing Recruitment Rules.
4. Learned counsel for the respondents further submits that the applicant has filed the present application before this Hon'ble Tribunal seeking quashing/setting aside of Advertisement No.15/2020 at Sr. No.02 dated dated 28.11.2020 issued by the answering respondent for recruitment to 35 posts of Statistical Officer (Planning/Statistics), along with all consequential proceedings, including the Combined Recruitment Test held on 19.09.2021, contending that by virtue of Office Office Memorandum No.7(1) E.Coord E.Coord-
I/2017 dated 12.04.2017, the said posts have lost their lawful existence and, therefore, the advertisement is void ab initio. The Page 9 of 23 SURAJ BISHT Item No.77/C-4 O.A. No.2463/2021 answering respondent submits that the contentions raised by the Applicant are false, baseless and factually incorrect, and are denied except to the extent they form part of the record, and further states that it has no role in the decisions of Respondent No.1 concerning recruitment, revival or abolition of posts or in granting promotion to Statistical ical Assistants, as such matters are governed by the guidelines of the Department of Personnel and Training. It is submitted that Respondent No.3 is a constitutional body established under Article 315 of the Constitution of India, entrusted with the obliga obligation of ensuring that selections for regular appointments to services/posts under its purview are conducted strictly in accordance with the applicable Recruitment Rules and instructions issued by the Government of India from time to time. The answering res respondent received a requisition dated 16.07.2020 from the Planning Department, Government of NCT of Delhi, for recruitment of 35 posts of Statistical Officer (Planning/Statistics), pursuant to which the vacancies (Vacancy No.20111502428) were advertised vid vide Advertisement No.15/2020 with the closing date of 17.12.2020. Thereafter, a recruitment test was conducted on 19.09.2021, the result of which was declared on 25.10.2021, and on the basis thereof, 127 candidates were provisionally shortlisted. It is furth further submitted that no specific relief has been sought against the Commission nor has any action of the answering respondent been directly challenged, and the issues raised in the present application are administrative in Page 10 of 23 SURAJ BISHT Item No.77/C-4 O.A. No.2463/2021 nature falling within the domain of the Government of NCT of Delhi, and the answering respondent appears to have been impleaded only on technical grounds. It is also noted that the applicants had earlier filed W.P.(C) No.10023/2021 along with CM Applications No.30934 30935/2021 before the Ho No.30934-30935/2021 Hon'ble High Court of Delhi, which was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty granted to approach this Hon'ble Tribunal. The answering respondent further submits that the withdrawal of 20 posts in 2013 and 21 posts in 2014 was solely the decision of Respondent No.1, and it had no role in such withdrawal, and similarly, the decision to fill or revive posts lies exclusively with Respondent No.1, while the answering respondent is only concerned with conducting the selection process in accordance with the applicable rules and instructions. It is reiterated that decisions regarding filling up of vacant posts, revival thereof, and the mode of recruitment, whether by promotion or direct recruitment, are to be determined by Respondent No.1 in accordance with the guidelines of the Department of Personnel and Training, and the guidelines answering respondent has no role in such determinations.
5. In rejoinder to the arguments put forth by the learned counsel for the respondents, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the Respondent pondent No.1 has failed to provide any appropriate response to the mandate of the DOPT rules issued by Respondent No.4 vide Office Memorandum No.7(1) E.Coord E.Coord-I/2017 dated 12.04.2017, which clearly stipulates that all posts, except newly created posts, Page 11 of 23 SURAJ BISHT Item No.77/C-4 O.A. No.2463/2021 kept in abeyance or remaining vacant for more than two years in any Ministry/Department/Attached Office/Subordinate Office/Statutory Body shall be considered as "deemed abolished" unless exempted at the time of sanctioning the post. It is submitted that the im impugned notification advertising 35 posts pertains to vacancies that had remained unfilled for more than two years and therefore fall within the category of deemed abolished posts, and the same have not been revived in accordance with the said Office Memora Memorandum. The Respondent No.1 has taken a defence that the advertised posts have not been abolished by various departments, which is stated to be vague, false, baseless and misconceived, as the Functional/User Departments are not authorized to abolish posts on their own and no correspondence was made by Respondent No.1 with such departments in this regard. It is further admitted by Respondent No.1 in its counter affidavit that departments had sought creation of additional posts of Statistical Officer under cadr cadre restructuring rather than abolition of existing posts, thereby indicating that such requests pertain to new/additional posts, whereas the impugned vacancies are existing backlog Direct Recruitment posts which have not been revived in terms of the DOPT Of Office Memorandum dated 12.04.2017, rendering the impugned notification liable to be set aside. It is further submitted that Respondent No.1 has taken contradictory stands, as in its counter affidavit it stated that after resolution of the issue vide circular circular dated 12.03.2020, requisition was sent on Page 12 of 23 SURAJ BISHT Item No.77/C-4 O.A. No.2463/2021 16.07.2020 for filling up 35 posts which were thereafter advertised vide Advertisement No.15/2020, thereby indicating that the posts had accumulated since 2010 and existed beyond two years, whereas in reply to RTI RTI dated 30.11.2020 it was stated that the vacancies pertain to the year 2020, which is alleged to be false and an attempt to cover illegal actions. From the admissions of Respondent No.1, it is evident that the posts had accumulated since 2010 and remained vacant beyond two years, thus falling within the category of deemed abolished posts and not having been revived as per the mandate of the Office Memorandum dated 12.04.2017, rendering the impugned notification liable to be set aside. It is further contend contended that Respondent No.1 has wrongly claimed that the impugned posts are still in existence, whereas as per the said Office Memorandum, revival of posts is permissible only in rare and unavoidable circumstances, and as per order dated 21.02.1997, revival re requires study by the Administrative Reforms Department, concurrence of the Finance Department and Ministry of Finance, and approval of the Hon'ble Lt. Governor, followed by formal notification. However, Respondent No.1 has overlooked these mandatory provisi provisions and sent requisition for 35 posts to UPSC without revival, rendering the same void ab initio as the posts had already lost their lawful existence. It is also submitted that Respondent No.1 failed to take necessary steps for filling the posts between 09 09.09.2014 and 24.08.2016 and further delayed the matter from 07.02.2017 to Page 13 of 23 SURAJ BISHT Item No.77/C-4 O.A. No.2463/2021 22.10.2019, as a result of which the posts, lying vacant since 2010, fall under the category of deemed abolished and were not revived in accordance with the Office Memorandum dated 112.04.2017, thereby making the impugned notification liable to be set aside. It is reiterated that the advertised vacancies are old and ought to be treated as deemed abolished in terms of the Finance Ministry Office Memorandum dated 12.04.2017, yet the Plan Planning Department proceeded to fill these posts without following due procedure and disregarded repeated representations of the Association and its members. It is further demonstrated through records that under the restructuring order dated 01.12.2006, there were 135 posts of Statistical Officers, out of which 25% i.e., 33 posts were earmarked for Direct Recruitment; however, only 20 posts were filled and 13 posts remained unfilled, and at least 8 of the filled posts became vacant by March 2014, indicating that that these are backlog vacancies which have not been filled since 2013 despite being vacant by March 2014, and therefore fall within the ambit of deemed abolished posts.
6. He further submitted that the the Respondent No.3 has failed to provide any appropriate response to the mandate of the DOPT rules issued by Respondent No.4 vide Office Memorandum No.7(1) E.Coord I/2017 dated 12.04.2017, which clearly provides that all E.Coord-I/2017 posts, except newly created posts, kept in abeyance or remaining vacant for more than two years in any Ministry/Department/Attached Office/Subordinate Office/Statutory Body shall be treated as "deemed Page 14 of 23 SURAJ BISHT Item No.77/C-4 O.A. No.2463/2021 abolished" unless exempted at the time of sanctioning the post, and the said provision is applicable to the impugned vacancies. It is submitted that the impugned notification advertising 35 posts pertains to vacancies which had remained vacant for more than two years and thus fall under the category of deemed abolished posts, and the same have not been revived in accordance with the said Office Memorandum; however, instead of seeking or demanding correspondence or documents regarding revival certificates from the concerned department as required under the settled rules and regulations, Respondent Respondent No.3 proceeded to notify the impugned advertisement and further conducted the Combined Recruitment Test even after the filing of the present Original Application, thereby failing to discharge its statutory duty, and no relevant documents regarding revival revival have been produced by Respondent No.3 till date, rendering the impugned notification and consequential proceedings liable to be set aside. It is further submitted that as per the said Office Memorandum dated 12.04.2017, revival of posts is permissible on only in rare and unavoidable circumstances, and as per the Finance Department order dated 21.02.1997, revival of lapsed posts requires a study by the Administrative Reforms Department, concurrence of the Finance Department and Ministry of Finance, and approv approval of the Hon'ble Lt. Governor followed by notification; however, Respondent No.1 overlooked these mandatory provisions and sent requisition for 35 posts to UPSC despite the posts having lost their lawful existence, Page 15 of 23 SURAJ BISHT Item No.77/C-4 O.A. No.2463/2021 and Respondent No.3, without demanding tthe requisite correspondence or proof of revival, notified the advertisement and conducted the written examination in contravention of law, making the impugned notification and resultant proceedings liable to be set aside. It is further contended that the ddefence taken by Respondent No.1 that the advertised posts have not been abolished by various departments is vague, false, baseless and misconceived, as under the settled rules, User or Functional Departments are only empowered to request filling or creation creation of posts but are not authorized to abolish posts, and no correspondence was made by Respondent No.1 with such departments in this regard; moreover, Respondent No.1 has admitted in its counter affidavit that departments requested creation of additional posts posts of Statistical Officer under cadre restructuring rather than abolition of existing posts, which clearly indicates that such proposals relate to additional posts, whereas the impugned vacancies are already created backlog direct recruitment posts that have ave not been revived in terms of the Office Memorandum dated 12.04.2017. Despite this, Respondent No.3 proceeded to notify the impugned advertisement for 35 posts and conduct the written examination without verifying revival in accordance with law, thereby acting in contravention of established rules, making the impugned notification and proceedings liable to be set aside. It is also submitted that Respondent No.3 issued the impugned advertisement solely on the basis of the actions of Respondent No.1, witho without Page 16 of 23 SURAJ BISHT Item No.77/C-4 O.A. No.2463/2021 seeking or verifying the requisite documents or revival certificates as mandated under the rules, thereby overlooking and ignoring the settled norms and regulations, and such actions on the part of both Respondents are likely to increase litigation on tthe subject and adversely impact the public exchequer.
7. Learned counsel for the respondents relies upon the additional affidavit filed on behalf of respondent no.1 stating that the deponent has read the contents of the present application under reply and states that the averments contained therein, to the exten extent they are inconsistent with the submissions made in the present reply affidavit, are incorrect and are therefore denied, and that any averment not specifically admitted or traversed shall be deemed to have been denied. It is further submitted that the pro process for strengthening the Planning and Statistical Cadre was already underway at the time of filing of the present Original Application, and a Cadre Review Committee had been duly constituted for the said purpose. The Committee undertook a review of the ccore functions of the Planning and Statistical Cadre personnel, including formulation, monitoring and review of schemes, programmes and projects, preparation of financial budgets for various schemes, programmes and projects, and preparation of budget estimates.
estimates. The Committee also considered the need for strengthening the cadre to provide a more organized decision support system across various sectors of society, noting inter alia that with the continuous increase in the population of Delhi, the budget of Page 17 of 23 SURAJ BISHT Item No.77/C-4 O.A. No.2463/2021 the Government of NCT of Delhi had significantly increased from Rs.14,265 crore in the year 2006-07 2006 07 to Rs.69,000 crore in the year 2021-22 22 to provide civic amenities and meet the aspirations of the residents of Delhi. It is further submitted that the recommen recommendations of the Cadre Review Committee were duly considered, and a proposal for creation and abolition of posts across various grades of the Planning and Statistical Cadre was submitted for approval of the Hon'ble Lt. Governor of Delhi, who, upon considerat consideration, approved the proposal for reorganization and restructuring of the Planning Department, resulting in the creation of 135 posts, including 79 additional posts of Statistical Officers, across different departments of the Government of NCT of Delhi. These 135 posts were sanctioned vide Order No.F.9(12)/2016/CC/Plg/1969 No.F.9(12)/2016/CC/Plg/1969-1978 dated 10.03.2022. It is further submitted that, on the recommendation of the Departmental Promotion Committee, the Chief Secretary approved the promotion of Statistical Assistants, Group Group 'B' (Non (Non-Gazetted) in Level-6 to the post of Statistical Officer, Group 'B' (Gazetted) in Level Level-7 with immediate effect vide Order Nos.9(09)/2021/CC/Plg/dirplg/3010 Nos.9(09)/2021/CC/Plg/dirplg/3010- 3052 and F.9(09)/2022/CC/Plg/8916-8968 F.9(09)/2022/CC/Plg/8916 8968 dated 08.04.2022 and 16.09.2022 respectively, whereby whereby a total of 89 (32 + 57) members were promoted, including several members belonging to the Delhi Planning and Statistical Services Association (Applicants), who accepted such promotions without objection. In view of the above, it is most respectfully submitted submitted that the relief sought in the present Page 18 of 23 SURAJ BISHT Item No.77/C-4 O.A. No.2463/2021 Original Application, namely issuance of directions to Respondent Nos.1 and 2 to expedite the process of reorganization and restructuring of the Planning and Statistical Cadre, has already been duly considered and implemented by the Respondents, and therefore, the present Original Application has become infructuous.
8. Heard counsel for the parties at length.
9. ANALYSIS 9.1. The contention urged by learned counsel for the applicant is that the Respondent No.3 has failed to provide any appropriate response to the mandate of the DOPT rules issued by Respondent No.4 vide Office Memorandum No.7(1) E.Coord E.Coord-I/2017 dated 12.04.2017, which clearly provides that all posts, except newly created posts, kept in abeyance or remaining vacant for more than two years in any Ministry/Department/Attached Office/Subordinate Office/Statutory Body shall be treated as "deemed abolished" unless exempted at the time of sanctioning the post, and the said provision is applicable to the impugned impugned vacancies. It is submitted that the impugned notification advertising 35 posts pertains to vacancies which had remained vacant for more than two years and thus fall under the category of deemed abolished posts, and the same have not been revived in accordance with the said Office Memorandum; however, instead of seeking or demanding correspondence or documents regarding revival certificates from the concerned department as required under the settled rules and regulations, Page 19 of 23 SURAJ BISHT Item No.77/C-4 O.A. No.2463/2021 Respondent No.3 proceeded to notify the impugned advertisement and further conducted the Combined Recruitment Test even after the filing of the present Original Application, thereby failing to discharge its statutory duty, and no relevant documents regarding revival have been produced produced by Respondent No.3 till date, rendering the impugned notification and consequential proceedings liable to be set aside. It is further submitted that as per the said Office Memorandum dated 12.04.2017, revival of posts is permissible only in rare and unavoidable oidable circumstances, and as per the Finance Department order dated 21.02.1997, revival of lapsed posts requires a study by the Administrative Reforms Department, concurrence of the Finance Department and Ministry of Finance, and approval of the Hon'ble L Lt.
Governor followed by notification; however, Respondent No.1 overlooked these mandatory provisions and sent requisition for 35 posts to UPSC despite the posts having lost their lawful existence, and Respondent No.3, without demanding the requisite correspondence pondence or proof of revival, notified the advertisement and conducted the written examination in contravention of law, making the impugned notification and resultant proceedings liable to be set aside. It is further contended that the defence taken by Res Respondent No.1 that the advertised posts have not been abolished by various departments is vague, false, baseless and misconceived, as under the settled rules, User or Functional Departments are only empowered to request filling or creation of posts but are not authorized to abolish Page 20 of 23 SURAJ BISHT Item No.77/C-4 O.A. No.2463/2021 posts, and no correspondence was made by Respondent No.1 with such departments in this regard; moreover, Respondent No.1 has admitted in its counter affidavit that departments requested creation of additional posts of Statistical Officer under cadre restructuring rather than abolition of existing posts, which clearly indicates that such proposals relate to additional posts, whereas the impugned vacancies are already created backlog direct recruitment posts that have not been revived revived in terms of the Office Memorandum dated 12.04.2017. Despite this, Respondent No.3 proceeded to notify the impugned advertisement for 35 posts and conduct the written examination without verifying revival in accordance with law, thereby acting in contravention contravention of established rules, making the impugned notification and proceedings liable to be set aside. It is also submitted that Respondent No.3 issued the impugned advertisement solely on the basis of the actions of Respondent No.1, without seeking or verifying verifying the requisite documents or revival certificates as mandated under the rules, thereby overlooking and ignoring the settled norms and regulations, and such actions on the part of both Respondents are likely to increase litigation on the subject and adversely rsely impact the public exchequer.
9.2. In Civil Appeal No.865 of 2021 titled THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS. VERSUS PRINCIPAL ABHAY NANDAN INTER COLLEGE & ORS. decided on 27.09.2021, the Hon'ble Apex Court observed as under:
Page 21 of 23
SURAJ BISHT Item No.77/C-4 O.A. No.2463/2021 "Article Article 14 is positive in nature. Adequate leverage is to be provided to the law maker in making the classification. Article 14 of the Constitution of India does not prohibit discrimination, what is required is a valid discrimination against a hostile one. We do not wish to multiply the aforesaid principle of law except quoting the following paragraph in Manish Kumar vs. Union of India, (2021) 5 SCC 1: "249. We see considerable merit in the stand of the Union. This is not a case where there is no intelligible intelligible differentia. The law under scrutiny is an economic measure. As laid down by this Court, in dealing with the challenge on the anvil of Article 14, the Court will not adopt a doctrinaire approach. Representatives of the people are expected to operate on ddemocratic principles. The presumption is that they are conscious of every fact, which would go to sustain the constitutionality of the law. A law cannot operate in a vacuum. In the concrete world, when the law is put into motion in practical experiences, bottlenecks bottlenecks that would flow from its application, are best envisaged by the law givers. Solutions to vexed problems made manifest through experience, would indeed require a good deal of experimentation, as long as it passes muster in law. It is no part of a court's function to probe into what it considers to be more wise or a better way to deal with a problem."
9.3. During the hearing, it became apparent that if the applicants' contention that positions deemed abolished should not have been contention--that filled--were were to be accepted while this original application is pending, the learned counsel has failed to acknowledge that applicant No. 3 also received a promotion following restructuring. These altered circumstances were explicitly detailed in an additional affidavit submitted bmitted by the respondents on December 5, 2024. Although the applicants have not disputed this additional affidavit, they continue to assert that the deemed abolished posts should not have been filled without due legal process. In doing so, they disregard the implication that such a stance would require a review of promotions awarded in 2022. Furthermore, no request has been made to us to backdate the promotion order. Within the context of service adjudication for disputes involving the State or Union and iits members, the duty of identifying abolished or surplus staff is entrusted as a component of Page 22 of 23 SURAJ BISHT Item No.77/C-4 O.A. No.2463/2021 assessing their financial capacity.
10. CONCLUSION
10.1. In view of the above analysis, we find no infirmity in the action of the respondents. The original applic application is devoid of merits and hence dismissed. All pending MAs,, if any, shall also stand dismissed. No costs.
Dr. Anand S Khati Manish Garg
Member (A) Member (J)
Page 23 of 23
SURAJ BISHT