Central Administrative Tribunal - Chandigarh
Pratibha Thind vs Education Deptt., Ut Chandigarh on 24 October, 2018
( O.A.No.060/01288/2018) 1
( Pratibha Thind vs. UOI & Ors. )
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
CHANDIGARH BENCH
O.A.NO. 060/001288/2018 Date of order:- 24.10.2018
Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Sanjeev Kaushik, Member (J)
Hon'ble Mrs.Ajanta Dayalan, Member (A).
Mrs. Pratibha Thind wife of Sh. Om Prakash Thind, working as
Lecturer(Hindi) in Government Model Senior Secondary School, Sector
20-D, Chandigarh-160020 ( resident of House NO.38, Sector 19-A,
Chandigarh-160019.
......Applicant.
( By Advocate :- Mr. D.R.Sharma)
Versus
1. Chandigarh Administration through Advisor to Administrator,
Union Territory, U.T. Secretariat, Sector 9, Chandigarh-160009.
2. The Education Secretary, Union Territory Secretariat, Sector 9,
Chandigarh-160009.
3. The Director Public Instructions (Schools) Chandigarh
Administration, Ist floor, Additional Deluxe building, Sector 9-D,
Chandigarh-160009.
...Respondents
O R D E R (Oral).
Sanjeev Kaushik, Member (J):
By means of present O.A, the applicant seeks issuance of writ of mandamus directing the respondents to promote her to the post of Principal, Government Senior Secondary School, by giving the benefit of 3% reservation to physically handicapped persons.
2. Learned counsel for the applicant states that the applicant is working as Lecturer in the Education department and is due for promotion under the physically handicapped quota. Despite there being judicial pronouncements to provide reservation to physically handicapped persons, the case of the applicant has not been ( O.A.NO.060/001288/2018 ) 2 (Pratibha Thind vs. UOI & Ors.) considered. He submits that the applicant has made a number of representations dated 3.3.2016, 1.8.2017 & 2.4.2018, but the same have not been decided till date.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant made a statement at the bar that the applicant will be satisfied if present O.A is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to decide the claim of the applicant for promotion to the post of Principal, by deciding the representation within some stipulated period.
4. Issue notice to the respondents. Shri Arvind Moudgil, Advocate, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. He does not object to the disposal of O.A, in above requested manner.
5. In the wake of above, we dispose of the O.A in limine with a direction to the competent authority amongst the respondents to consider and decide the representations filed by the applicant, by passing a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law, expeditiously. Order so passed by duly communicated to the applicant.
6. Needless to say that the disposal of O.A may not be construed as an expression of any opinion on merit of the case.
(SANJEEV KAUSHIK) MEMBER (J) (AJANTA DAYALAN) MEMBER (A).
Dated:-24.10.2018.
Kks