Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Central Administrative Tribunal - Jaipur

Harish Meghwal vs Department Of Posts on 16 February, 2024

OA No. 433/2023                                        1

        CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
             JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR

          ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO. 433/2023

Order Reserved on: 30.01.2024

                       DATE OF ORDER: 16.02.2024
CORAM

HON'BLE MS. RANJANA SHAHI, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE MR. LOK RANJAN, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER

Harish Meghwal S/o Shri Rajkumar Meghwal, aged
about 29 years, Resident of Rani Road, Hawala Kalan,
Badgaon, Udaipur, Rajasthan at present working on
the post of MTS (Multi-Tasking Staff), Head Record
Office, Ajmer, Rajasthan. Phone: 8005880863: Email:
[email protected] Group 'D',

Sub.: Promotion
                                           ....Applicant

Shri Pankaj Arora, counsel for the applicant.

                       VERSUS

1. Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of
   Communication, Department of           Posts, Dak
   Bhawan, New Delhi.
2. The Director (DE), Ministry of Communication,
   Department of Posts, Dak Bhawan, New Delhi-
   110001.
3. The Assistant Director (Rectt), Office of the Chief
   Postmaster General, Rajasthan Circle, Jaipur-
   302007.
4. The Postmaster General, Rajasthan Southern
   Region, Ajmer, Rajasthan-305001.

                                        .... Respondents

Shri N.C. Goyal, counsel for respondents

                         ORDER

Per: RANJANA SHAHI, JUDICIAL MEMBER The present Original Application has been filed by the applicant being aggrieved by the result dated OA No. 433/2023 2 11.08.2023 (Annexure A/1) declared by the Department of Posts, India, Office of the Chief Postmaster General, Rajasthan Circle, Jaipur.

2. Brief facts of the case, as stated by the applicant, are that the applicant through the direct recruitment was previously appointed as GDS BPM Mohammed Phalasiya in account with Jadol (P) w.e.f. 23.05.2014. Thereafter, he was promoted on the post of Multi- Tasking Staff (MTS) on 10.04.2023 in Head Record Office, Ajmer, Rajasthan. The respondent-department has issued a Notification dated 15.03.2023 for promotion to the post of Postman and Mail Guard from Multi-Tasking Staff. The applicant being eligible for promotion to the said post has applied while submitting his Form on 28.03.2023 and gave written examination, which was held on 30.04.2023. Thereafter, the respondent-department has issued the answer key on 04.07.2023 wherein the applicant claims that after cross checking his marks, he found himself having attained 86.47 percent marks. He claims that he attained good marks and is fully eligible candidate to sit in the next step of examination i.e. (DEST) Data Entry Skill Test, which is scheduled to be held on 20.08.2023 but the applicant's name was not included in the result of the selected candidates list. OA No. 433/2023 3 Hence, the applicant has filed the present O.A. praying for quashing and setting aside the result dated 11.08.2023 (Annexure A/1), besides, he has prayed that the respondents be directed to issue new result / addendum to existing result, containing his name and roll number, being eligible and further to consider his candidature and allow him to appear in the Data Entry Skill Test dated 20.08.2023.

3. The grounds on which the present O.A. has been filed by the applicant are that he was "taken aback"

on not finding his name in the result declared by the respondents for promotion / recruitment to the cadre of MTS and Postman / Mail Guard for the vacancy year 2023 held on 30.04.2023 and eligible for the Data Entry Skill Test (DEST) scheduled to be held on 20.08.2023. The second ground taken by the applicant is that he was not given opportunity to be heard while not including his name in the list of successful candidates.

4. In their reply, the respondents have stated that total 101 vacancies [113-6 (compassionate) - 6 (sports quota) = 101] were available for the GDS candidates to be recruited as Postman / Mail Guard through the aforesaid examination. Out of total 101 vacancies, 15 vacancies had been earmarked to SC OA No. 433/2023 4 category candidates in the Rajasthan Circle. While only 1 vacancy was available for SC candidate in Udaipur Division. Accordingly, the committee constituted for short listing the candidate for DEST had short listed total 309 GDS candidates for GDS quota vacancies for Postman/ Mail Guard as per instructions of the notification. The applicant has secured the marks and merit as under: -

A. Marks of the applicant -

Paper-    Paper    Combined        Paper-III    Paper-III       Total marks
I         -II      total      of   (Objective   (Descriptive    of Paper-III
                   Paper-I & II    Part)        Part
(1)       (2)      (3)=(1)+(2)     (4)          (5)             (6)=(4)+(5)
62        34       96              17           11              28

B. Merit of the applicant -

Sl. No.     Merit Category                         Merit position number
1           SC category merit in Udaipur           23
            Division
2           SC category merit in the Circle        141
3           General merit in the Circle            583


In view of the above, the applicant has not secured the required merit for being shortlisted for DEST. Accordingly, the applicant was not shortlisted by the committee for the DEST scheduled on 20.08.2023.

5. Heard both sides.

6. On perusing the reply filed by the respondents, it emerges that there were total 101 vacancies available for GDS candidates. Out of 101 vacancies, 15 vacancies were earmarked for SC category in the OA No. 433/2023 5 Rajasthan Circle. While, only 01 vacancy was available for SC candidate in Udaipur Division. The committee constituted for short listing the candidates for DEST, had shortlisted thrice the number of vacancies, totaling 309 GDS candidates for GDS Quota vacancies for Postman/ Mail Guard in accordance with the instructions of the Notification dated 15.03.2023. In para 9 of their reply, the respondents have given in table "A" the marks scored by the applicant in tabular form. In table "B", they have given the merit position of the applicant against each category. Against the vacancy of 01 available for SC category in Udaipur Division, the merit position of the applicant is 23. Against 15 vacancies for SC category in Rajasthan Circle, the merit position of the applicant is 141. Against General Category, the merit position of the applicant is 583. It is evident from the above that the applicant nowhere falls even near to the successful candidates as short-listed based on the merit position. The self evaluation that the applicant has claimed in his OA has no meaning, as to the grounds taken by the applicant that he was not given an opportunity of being heard, the merit list is drawn on the basis of the written examination and the demand for giving the opportunity of hearing and following the principle of natural justice before declaration of the result of OA No. 433/2023 6 examination is completely misplaced. The main ground taken by the applicant that he was in a state of shock on not finding his name in the declared result, are personal to him.

7. In view of the above, we find no merit in the present case and the same deserves to be dismissed.

8. Accordingly, the present Original Application is dismissed. No order as to costs.

   (LOK RANJAN)                     (RANJANA SHAHI)
ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER                JUDICIAL MEMBER



+/nlk/