Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Mr. Saurav Kumar vs Council Of Scientific And Industrial ... on 25 May, 2015
Central Administrative Tribunal
Principal Bench, New Delhi.
1. OA-2343/2014 3. OA-3727/2014
MA-1952/2014 MA-3204/2014
MA-485/2015
MA-2690/2014
MA-53/2015
2. OA-2495/2014 4. OA-4361/2014
MA-2109/2014 MA-3826/2014
MA-2693/2014 MA-1150/2015
Reserved on : 06.05.2015/
13.05.2015.
Pronounced on :25.05.2015.
Honble Mr. G. George Paracken, Member (J)
Honble Mr. Shekhar Agarwal, Member (A)
OA-2343/2014
1. Mr. Saurav Kumar,
S/o Sh. Santosh Narayan Pandey.
2. Mr. Suryakant Gautam,
S/o Sh. Shiv Ganesh Gautam.
3. Mr. Jaswant Singh,
S/o Sh. Gurmukh Singh.
4. Mr. Suman Tewary,
S/o Sh. Ardhendu Sekhar Tewary.
5. Mr. Amit Gupta,
S/o Sh. Vinod Gupta.
6. Mr. Vinod Parmar,
S/o Sh. Gajender Singh.
(Applicants No. 1 to 6 are working in CSIR-CSIO Laboratory,
Chandigarh)
7. Ms. Manvi Malik,
D/o Sh. Naresh Kumar Malik.
8. Mr. Spandan Roy,
S/o Sh. Samar Ranjan Roy.
9. Mr. Prasum Mishra,
S/o Sh. Kamal Sharma.
10. Ms. Aniesha Chebolu,
D/o Dr. Ch. S. Gopala Krishna Murty.
11. Mr. Dennis Babu,
S/o Sh. Babu K.L.
(Applicants No. 7 to 11 are working in CSIR-CMERI Laboratory
Durgapur, West Bengal)
12. Mr. Thondepu Anil Pradyumna,
S/o Sh. T. Rama Siva Gupta.
13. Ms. M. Surya,
D/o Sh. N. Maruthu Pandian.
14. Ms. Sarada Pulugurta,
D/o Sh. P.V.L. Narayan.
15. Mr. Gautam Raj Godawarthi,
S/o Sh. Indu Sarma.
16. Mr. Shahbaz Khan,
S/o sh. Mustaq Ahmed.
(Applicants No. 12 to 16 are working in CSIR-CRRI Laboratory,
New Delhi)
17. Mr. Satyajit Sarkar,
S/o Sh. Sanat Kumar Sarkar.
18. Mr. Biplab Ghosh,
S/o Sh. Santosh Ghosh.
19. Mr. Deepak Nayak,
S/o Sh. Naba Kishore Nayak.
20. Mr. Nigamananda Ray,
S/o Sh. Khageshwar Mandhata Mohapatra.
21. Ms. Anita Panda,
D/o Sh. Biswanath Panda.
22. Mr. Jitendra Kumar Sadangi,
S/o Sh. Rabindranath Sadangi.
23. Mr. Rahul Mohanty,
S/o Sh. Rabindra Kumar Mohanty.
(Applicants No. 17 to 23 are working in CSIR-IMMT Laboratory,
Bhubaneshwar)
24. Ms. Shivangi Nigam,
D/o Sh. Sushil Kumar.
25. Ms. Shilpa Kumari,
D/o Sh. Gopal Chandra Roy.
(Applicants No. 24 and 25 are working in CSIR-NEERI Laboratory,
Nagpur)
26. Ms. Indu Elizabeth,
D/o Sh. Chackochan V.
27. Mr. Anuj Krishna,
S/o Sh. Shailendra Kumar.
28. Mr. Vattikonda Bharath,
S/o Sh. V. Venkateshwar Rao.
29. Ms. Deepika Yadav,
D/o Sh. Mahesh K. Yadav.
30. Mr. Dibyajyoti Mohanty,
S/o Sh. Uma Charan Mohanty.
31. Mr. Achu Chandran,
S/o Sh. R. Subhash Chandran Pillai.
32. Mr. Aswin. V,
S/o Sh. P.N. Vishnuradhan. .. Applicants
(Applicants No. 26 to 32 are working in CSIR-NPL Laboratory,
New Delhi.
Versus
Council of Scientific and Industrial Research,
Anusandhan Bhawan,
2, Rafi Marg, New Delhi-1. . Respondent
OA-2495/2014
1. Mr. Amit Kumar, 25 years
S/o sh. Ashok Kumar Sharma,
DOB-1.8.1988.
2. Mr. Asish Kumar Singh, 26 years
S/o Sh. Surendra Prakash Singh,
DOB-4.1.1988.
3. Mr. Bhavit Kaushik, 26 years
S/o Sh. Sondatt Sharma,
DOB-12.11.1988.
4. Mr. Ram Prakash Lamba, 26 years
S/o Sh. Dhoop Singh Lamba,
DOB-6.7.1988.
5. Mr. Ranjan Kumar Maurya, 25 years
S/o Sh. Tribhuwan Prasad Maurya,
DOB-14.9.1988.
6. Ms. Saroj Kanta Patra, 26 years
D/o Sh. Debendra Nath Patra,
DOB-2.11.1990.
7. Ms. Somshukla Maiti, 25 years
D/o Dr. Swaraj Bhushan Maiti,
DOB-8.5.1989. .. Applicants
(Applicants are working in CSIR-CEERI Laboratory Pilani, Rajasthan)
Versus
Council of Scientific and Industrial Research
Anusandhan Bhawan,
2, Rafi Marg, New Delhi-1. .. Respondent
OA-3727/2014
1. Mr. Saurav Kumar, 27 years
S/o Sh. Santosh Narayan Pandey.
2. Mr. Jaswant Singh, 27 years
S/o Sh. Gurmukh Singh.
(Applicants No.1 and 2 are working in CSIR-CSIO Laboratory,
Chandigarh)
3. Mr. Amit Kumar, 27 years
S/o sh. Ashok Kumar Sharma. . Applicants
(Applicant No. 3 is working in CSIR-CEERI Laboratory, Pilani)
Versus
Council of Scientific and Industrial Research
Anusandhan Bhawan,
2, Rafi Marg, New Delhi-1. .. Respondent
OA-4361/2014
1. Sajjad Hussain, 24 years
S/o Sh. Shamim Akhtar,
R/o near Town Hall,
Whitty Nazar, Giridih,
Jharkhand.
2. Vijaya Krishna Yalavarthi, 24 years
S/o Sh. Siva Rangarao,
R/o 2-34-4, Tenali,
Andhra Pradesh.
3. Rashmi Achla, 25 years
D/o Sh. P. Minz,
R/o Village Kesramal Barkatoli,
Rajganpur,
Odisha Pin-770017.
4. Jayant Kumar, 28 years
S/o Sh. Ramashankar,
R/o Sector K-803, Aashiana Colony,
Lucknow, Pin-226012.
5. Bhoopendra Kumar, 26 years
S/o Sh. Sri Bhagirath,
R/o H-225, Atrauliya Rath,
Hamirpur, Uttar Pradesh-210431.
6. Santosh Kumar Gondhi, 25 years
S/o Sh. G. Vijaya Kumar,
R/o FT-4C, Rhythm Towers,
Paruchurivari Veedi, Patamatalanka,
Vijayawada, Pin : 520010.
7. Manish Kumar Vishwakarma, 23 years
S/o Sh. R.S. Wishwakarma,
R/o C/85 World Bank Scheme Barra,
Kanpur-208027 (UP).
8. Saransh Khandewal, 25 years
S/o Sh. Ajai Kumar Khandelwal,
R/o 46/47 Shyam Ganj Bareilly,
Uttar Pradesh.
9. Md. Tanweer, 26 years
S/o Md. Khalil,
V/o Vill-Ramjanpur,
Post-Bhaga, Dist-Dhanbad,
Jharkhand-828301.
10. Prasad Bhukya, 23 years
S/o Sh. Dhublo,
R/o Bachodu Thanda Village,
Bachodu Post, Thirumalaya Palem Mandal,
Khammam Dist, Telangana State-507161.
11. Satya Prakash Sahu, 24 years
S/o Sh. Digamber Sahu,
R/o At-Mirapatna, Dist/Po-Kendrapara,
Odisha-754211.
12. Arka Jyoti Das, 25 years
S/o Sh. Asit Baran Das,
R/o 46/P, Hemanta Mukherjee Road,
Jayrampur Jala, Behala, Kolkata,
West Bengal, Pin-700060.
13. Nilabjendu Ghosh, 26 years
S/o Sh. Biswadeb Ghosh,
R/o 105, B.B.D. Sarani City Centre,
Durgapur-713216.
14. Jaywardhan Kumar, 27 years,
S/o Sh. Bandhu Ram,
R/o Village-Alampur, Post-Phesar,
Dist-Aurangabad, Bihar-824121.
15. Vivek Kumar Himanshu, 26 years
S/o Sh. Jainandan Prasad,
R/o Vill-Tina, P.O-Tina Lodipur,
P.S-Nagarnausa, Dist-Nalanda,
Bihar-801305.
16. Swaha Mahapatra, 25 years
D/o Sh. Sridhar Mahapatra,
R/o 11/4, Anand Vihar, A-Zone,
Durgapur, West Bengal-713204.
17. Santosh Kumar Behera, 24 years
S/o Sh. Subash Chandra Behera,
R/o AT/PO-Baulagam, Via-Chatrapur,
Dist-Ganjam, Odisha, Pin-761026.
18. Debashish Mishra, 23 years
S/o Sh. Kailash Chandra Mishra,
R/o Plot No. 750/D,At-Bhimpur,
Unit-6, Near Kansari Jharana,
Bhubaneswar, Pin-751020, Odisha.
19. Anind Rastogi, 25 years
S/o Sh. Ashish Rastogi,
R/o Mohan Tower, Subhash Marg,
Lucknow-226004 (UP).
20. Dharmendra Kumar Singh, 25 years
S/o Sh. Shomnath Singh,
R/o QT No. B/217, B.C.C.L. Officers Colony,
Nehru Nager, Harina Baghmara,
Nawagrah, Dhanbad, Jharkhand,
Pin-828306.
21. Vasvi Aggarwal, 25 years
D/o Sh. Rakesh Aggarwal,
R/o 106, Vaishali, Pitampura,
New Delhi-110088.
22. Prabin Kumar Ashish, 26 years
S/o Sh. Nathun Choudhary,
R/o Vill-Chhaprapur, P.O-Narayanpur,
District-Bhojpur (Ara), Bihar-802201.
23. Minal, 25 years
D/o Sh. Basant Kumar,
R/o 106, Savitri Nilyam, Road No.37,
Gardanibagh, P.O. Anisabad, Patna,
Bihar-800002.
24. Sravani Arimilli, 25 years
D/o Sh. Nageswara Rao Arimilli,
R/o H.No. 165, Kolimanpet, Duddi Post,
Kosigi Man, Kurnool Dist,
Andhra Pradesh, Pin: 518313.
25. Paritosh Singh, 24 years
S/o Sh. Bhagwati Pux Singh,
R/o Village/Post-Sareni, Distt-Raebareli,
State-Uttar Pradesh-229212.
26. Mohammad Yameen, 24 years
S/o Dr. Wahab Uddin,
R/o ARIES Campus, Manora Peak,
Nainital-263002, Uttarakhand.
27. Jaya Dwivedi, 23 years
D/o Sh. Siddhi Nath Dwivedi,
R/o H.No. 440/A Kauwa Bagh,
Rly Colony, Gorakhpur,
UP-273010.
28. Nallamothu Bala Krishna, 23 years
S/o Sh. Nallamothu Rajendra Prasad,
R/o Door No:13-94, Chavavaripalem,
Tenali (MD), Guntur(DT),
Andhra Pradesh-522211.
29. Mohd. Meraj Khan, 27 years
S/o Mohd. Ali Khan,
R/o Vill. Rendwalia, Post. Pehar,
Dist. Balrampur,UP-271604.
30. Harshal Agarwal, 24 years
S/o Sh. Sanjay Agarwal,
R/o H.No.365, Alamgiriganj,
Near Bargad Wala Mandir,
Bareilly-243001, Uttar Pradesh.
31. Reddi Kamesh, 24 years
S/o Sh. Reddi Demudu Babu,
R/o DR#5-59, Rangali Veedhi,
K-Kotapadu, Vishakapatnam (Dist),
Andhra Pradesh-531034.
32. Siddhartha Moulik, 25 years
S/o Sh. Sumit Kumar Moulik,
R/o Vill-Ghoradhara; P.O.-Jhargram,
Dist: Paschim Medinipur,
West Bengal; PIN-721507.
33. Pavani Vadthya, 25 years
D/o Sh. Hoonya V,
R/o H.No.17-1-382/P/9,
Pavanpuri Colony,
Karmanghat, Vaishali Nagar P.O.,
Sagar Road, Hyderabad,
Telangana, Pin-500079.
34. Vineet Aniya, 24 year
S/o Sh. Mahesh Kumar Aniya,
R/o 337/537, E.W.S. Indranagar Agar
Road Ujjain (MP).
35. Alka Kumar, 25 year
D/o Sh. R.B. Choudhary,
R/o At-Kanchanpur, Post-Rajason,
Dist-Vaishani, Bihar-844102.
36. MNV Anil, 25 years
S/o Sh. M. Rama Manohar,
R/o 12-2-828-A-46, Sri Nilayam Apts,
Amba Gardens, Hyderabad.
37. Malay Goel, 25 years,
S/o Sh. Manoj Goel,
R/o 91, Keshav Vihar, GMS Road,
Dehradun, PIN-248171.
38. Rajendra Prasad Poluru, 25 years
S/o Sh. Poluru Venkatesh,
R/o 2-8 Katur Village, B.N.Kandriga Mandal,
Chittor District, Andha Pradesh-517640.
39. Durgaprasad Yedla, 24 years
S/o Sh. Yadla Sathi Raju,
R/o D.No.5-86, Manthina Street,
Vedurupaka, Rayavaram Mandal,
East Godavari District,
Andhra Pradesh-533345.
40. Iranna Gogeri, 27 years
S/o Sh. Kumareshwar,
R/o K.V. Gogeri, Post:Hebballi,
Taluk : Badami, Dist: Bagalkot.
41. Mohd Asif, 25 years
S/o Sh. Intaf Ali,
R/o Vill-Govindpura Po&The-Swar,
Distt-Rampur, UP-244924.
42. Eshan Singh, 23 years
S/o Sh. Ram Kishan Singh,
R/o C-501/C, Indira Nagar,
Lucknow, 226016, UP.
43. Viphretuo Mere, 24 years
S/o Sh. Neivillie Mere,
R/o NB/S-16, Nagabazar,
Kohima, Nagaland-797001.
44. Anand Abhihek, 25 years
S/o Sh. Binod Kumar Sinha,
R/o Dr. Binod Kumar Sinha,
Prakash Puri, Ara Bhojpur-802301,
Bihar.
45. Subhash Kumar Ram, 26 years
S/o Sh. Suresh Ram,
R/o Sh. Suresh Ram, VPO-Basaha
Mirzapur, Via Anandpur,
Distt. Darbhanga, Vihar-847101.
46. Soumedu Sinha, 25 years
S/o sh. Udayanand Sinha,
R/o S/o Mr. Udayanand Sinha,
At-Roushan Lal Housing Co
Operative Colony (Harnichak)
Anishabad, Patna-800002(Bihar).
47. Sachin Dhariwal, 23 years
S/o Sh. Satyapal Singh,
R/o Village & Post Kheri Mubarikpur
Tehsil Laksar, Distt. Haridwar,
Uttarakhand-247663.
48. Sukalyan Saha, 24 years
S/o Kalachand Saha,
R/o B-6/212, Kalyani Nadia,
West Bengal-741235.
49. Meenakshi Sarkar, 24 years
D/o Biswanath Sarkar,
R/o D-II/31, Vidya Sagar Avenue,
B-Zone, Durgapur, West Bengal,
Pin-713205.
50. Pratikkumar Vikramark Raje, 25 years
S/o Sh. Vikramark Jamnadas Raje,
R/o C/o Archana Pantawne,
Near Gautam Vachnalay, Siraspeth,
Nagpur-440027, Maharashtra.
51. Shatadal Ghosh, 26 years
S/o Sh. Madhab Kumar Ghosh,
R/o Village+Post Hanskhall,
District Nadia, Pin-741505,
West Bengal.
52. Irin Bandypadhyaya, 26 years
D/o Sri Chandan Kr. Bandypadhyay,
R/o 13A, Narashingha Avenue,
Kolkata-74, West Bengal. . Applicants
Versus
1. Ministry of Science and Technology,
Govt. of India through
Its Secretary,
Technology Bhavan, New Mehrauli Road,
New Delhi-110016.
2. Council of Scientific & Industrial Research
Through Director General,
Anusandhan Bhawan, 2, Rafi Marg,
New Delhi-1. . Respondents
Present : Sh. V. Shekhar, Sr. Counsel with Sh. Amit Kumar and
Dr. Sumant Bhardwaj with Ms. Mridula R. Bhardwaj, Counsel for applicants.
Sh. Praveen Swaroop, Counsel for respondents.
O R D E R
Mr. Shekhar Agarwal, Member (A) OA-2343/2014, OA-2445/2014 & OA-3727/2014 The issue involved in these three OAs is the same. Hence, they are being disposed of by this common order.
2. An advertisement was published by the respondents on 27.04.2011 in leading newspapers inviting applications from engineering graduates in relevant disciplines with minimum 70% marks. The selected candidates were to be designated as Trainee Scientist under Quick Hire Scientist Scheme and were to be trained on live projects to make them research-ready. They were to receive consolidated emoluments of Rs.25,000/- p.m. along with other benefits as applicable to QHS of CSIR. They were to undergo a Post Graduate programme leading to advance diploma for a period of two years. On successful completion of this programme with distinction, they were assured that they would be considered for absorption in CSIR as Scientists in Pay Band-3 with Grade Pay of Rs.6600/-. In response to this advertisement, 7408 candidates applied, out of which 81 were selected. Letters were issued to the selected 81 candidates on 29.07.2011. They joined on 09.08.2011. They completed the programme on 12.07.2013. 78 candidates out of 81 candidates passed the programme with distinction. On 27.09.2013, CSIR issued a letter granting extension in tenure to them. The Recruitment and Assessment Board held interviews on 18.12.2013 for induction of these candidates in CSIR. On 26.12.2013, the respondents issued appointment letters to the applicants appointing 56 of them as Scientists. However, on 01.01.2014, their appointments were kept in abeyance. The applicants wrote to CSIR on 21.02.2014 and made another representation on 19.05.2014. On 09.07.2014, they filed OA-2343/2014 before this Tribunal. On 15.07.2014, this Tribunal as an interim measure, directed that the services of the applicant shall not be discontinued during the pendency of the O.A. However, on 19.09.2014, the respondents by the impugned order cancelled their appointments. Hence, some of the applicants of OA-2495/2014 and OA-2343/2014 have joined together to file this O.A. No. 3727/2014 seeking the following relief:-
(a) Quash the order dated 19.9.2014 etc. passed by CSIR regarding cancelling the appointment of Scientists of PRGPE-2011.
(b) Direct the CSIR to appoint the applicants-PRGPE-2011 as Scientist in CSIR as per appointment order dated 26.12.2013 etc.
(c) To call for the records leading to the appointment of the applicants
(d) To declare that the applicants-PRGPE-2011 are entitled to immediate appointment as Scientist in CSIR.
e) Grant such other reliefs as may be prayed for and the Court may deem fit to grant; and
(f) Grant the costs of this Original Application.
2. The contention of the applicants is that the action of the respondents in first keeping their appointments in abeyance and thereafter canceling the same was illegal, unjust and arbitrary. It was inconsistent with the principles of natural justice. The applicants had been recruited with the promise of being inducted in CSIR on successful completion of the two years academic programme with distinction. They accordingly passed the aforesaid programme. Thereafter, they were assessed by the Selection Committee and 56 of them were selected for induction. Thereafter, appointment letters were also issued to them. Now by cancelling their appointment letters for some administrative reasons, the respondents are spoiling career of the applicants, who were bright and talented persons. When they were appointed as trainees under the Quick Hire Scientist Scheme it was mentioned in their appointment letters that they shall not be permitted to apply outside CSIR. Again when appointment letters were issued to them on 26.12.2013, they were asked to withdraw their applications for appointments elsewhere made prior to the date of the issue of the appointment letter. Thus, the respondents were playing with the career of the applicants by first not permitting them to apply anywhere else and thereafter cancelling their appointments in CSIR as well. On these grounds, the applicants have prayed that their O.A. be allowed.
3. In their reply and the written arguments, the respondents have stated that CSIR is a society registered under the Society Registration Act. It is an autonomous body fully funded by the Government of India, Ministry of Science and Technology. Various Laboratories and Institutes were affiliated to it. In 2009 CSIR started a programme of induction of Scientists through Post Graduate Research Programme in Engineering (PGRPE) Scheme. It was under this Scheme that the applicants were initially engaged. However, this engagement was purely contractual in nature and not a regular appointment. This is clear from the fact that out of 81 selected Scientist Trainees only 56 were offered appointments as Scientists. Further, in the letter engaging them, it was clearly mentioned that it was a traineeship award for a period of two years on consolidated emoluments of Rs. 25,000/-. It was not an offer of appointment in CSIR in any capacity. It is true that some of the candidates of 2009 and 2010 had got regular placements in Laboratories/Institutes of CSIR after being selected by Selection Committee constituted for this purpose. However, when the applicants herein, who are of PGRPE 2011 batch, were considered for appointment as Scientists-C a complaint was received through the office of the Vice President, CSIR/Honble Minister for Science & Technology. The said complaint was examined in the department and as a result thereof the Honble Minister after considering grave irregularities in the appointments including violation of CSRAP Rules approved that the selection of the applicants be kept in abeyance. Thereafter, Honble Minister approved quashing of these appointments. On 25.04.2014, RAB requested for reconsideration of this decision and referred the matter again to Honble Minister/Vice-President, CSIR. However, it was found that there was no ground to reconsider the decision taken earlier.
3.1 The respondents have further stated that the recruitment process was vitiated due to irregularities noticed in the recruitment process. No open advertisement was floated as was necessary under Rule 6.5 of CSRAP Rules, 2001. Instructions on reservation were not followed, which was violation of Constitutional provisions and Government of India Instructions. Even the vacancy position was not known at the time of recommending the appointment. The respondents have relied on the judgment of Honble Supreme Court in the case of District Collector and Chairman Vizianagaram (Social Welfare) Vs. M. Tripura Sundari Devi, 1990(4) SLR 237 in which it has been held that appointments made in disregard of the qualifications mentioned is a fraud and no Court should be party to perpetuation of fraudulent of such practice.
3.2 The respondents have argued that the main controversy in the present OAs is whether Trainee Scientists under QHS could be directly absorbed as Scientists in CSIR dispensing with the requirement of issue of an advertisement in terms of CSRAP Rules, 2001. When the applicants were engaged, the words used in the advertisement were that Trainee Scientist would be considered for absorption in CSIR. No where it was mentioned that their absorption would be automatic and without going through the process specified in the Recruitment Rules. Moreover, their engagement as Trainee Scientist was only for a period of two years and there was no requirement to continue them beyond this period. The only promise that was made to them was of consideration for absorption in CSIR. The respondents are prepared to do so in accordance with the Recruitment Rules. Relying on the judgment of Honble Supreme Court in the case of CSIR and Ors. Vs. Dr. Ajay Kumar Jain, 2000(4) SCC 186, the respondents have stated that in the aforesaid judgment Honble Supreme Court has held that appointments made under various Schemes and Projects in CSIR on contract basis for a limited period do not entitle the incumbents to get absorbed against regular vacancies.
4. We have heard both sides and have perused the material on record. We have seen the advertisement issued on 27.04.2011 by which the applicants were invited to submit applications for being engaged as Scientist Trainees under the QHS. The relevant part of the advertisement is extracted below:-
The selected candidate will be designated as Scientist Trainee under Quick Hire Scientist (QHS) Scheme and they will be trained on exciting live projects so that they emerge as research-ready scientists/engineers for taking up challenging positions. Such candidates shall receive a consolidated emolument of Rs.25000 p.m. and would also enjoy other benefits as applicable to QHS of CSIR.
PGRPE is a four-semester programme. Course fees per semester is Rs.24000.
On successful completion of the PGRPE with distinction, the candidates may be considered for absorption in CSIR as Scientists in Pay Band-3 of the Government of India (Scale Rs.15600-39100 with Grade Pay of Rs.6600 plus other allowances as applicable.). 4.1 It is clear from the above that the respondents had promised the applicants that if they successfully complete the PGRPE with distinction, they shall be considered for absorption in CSIR as Scientists in the PB-3 with Grade Pay of Rs.6600/-. Thus, right of consideration for the post of Scientist was assured. However, the respondents did not mention in the advertisement as to what would happen to those who do not complete the PGRPE programme with distinction or to those who are subsequently assessed and not found fit for absorption in CSIR. Both sides agreed that those who did not pass the PGRPE with distinction have since left without claiming that they be continued as Trainee Scientists. Similarly those who were assessed and not found suitable for absorption have also left CSIR. The applicants herein were only 56 of 81 such candidates who were issued appointment letters, which were subsequently cancelled when some irregularities were noticed in the recruitment process.
4.2 The respondents have stated that Rule 6.5 of CSRAP Rules, 2001 provides for issue of an open advertisement before considering appointments as Scientist in CSIR. The said Rule reads as follows:-
Vacancies for which the Selections are required to be made by the Board shall be decided by the Labs/Instts./CSIR Hqrs with the approval of RC of the Lab or DG/CSIR as the case may be. The vacancies shall be advertised by the respective Labs/Instts./CSIR Hqrs. A copy of the advt. shall be sent to the Board. 4.3 In the instant case, the same was not done and the recruitment was kept confined to only the Trainee Scientists recruited under the QHS. We therefore find merit in the contention of the respondents that this was against the CSRAP Rules. In public employment every candidate possessing the necessary qualifications laid down for the post has a right to be considered for appointment to the said post. By not issuing the advertisement as provided under the Rules and keeping the recruitment confined only to candidates of PGRPE programme, the respondents had deprived many candidates, who could have otherwise applied for these posts. Even in the advertisement by which the applicants were engaged as Trainee Scientists, the only promise made was that they shall be considered for absorption in CSIR as Scientists. No where, it was mentioned that the consideration would be exclusively confined to them. Since in the instant case this was exactly done, we do not find any infirmity in the action of the respondents in cancelling these appointments.
4.4 The applicants, however, had a right to be considered and such consideration should now be done by the respondents in accordance with the procedure prescribed under the Rules. The question now to be decided is what would happen to the applicants in the interregnum till such consideration is done. We notice from the facts of the case narrated above that the respondents themselves had extended the tenure of the applicants on their own first vide their letter dated 27.09.2013 and then again vide their letter dated 11.07.2014. Thus, the applicants were continued as Trainee Scientists till consideration of their appointment as Scientists was completed. Both sides had admitted that the applicants were still continuing under interim orders of the Tribunal dated 15.07.2014. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we direct that the respondents shall not discontinue the services of the applicants till they have considered them for absorption as Scientists in CSIR as was promised to them. Such consideration should now be done expeditiously to avoid any further loss to the applicants due to mistake committed by the respondents.
5. Thus while declining the prayer of the applicants to quash orders keeping their appointment in abeyance and thereafter cancelling them, we dispose of these O.As with a direction to the respondents to consider the applicants for absorption as Scientists in CSIR in accordance with CSRAP Rules in PB-3 with grade pay of Rs.6600/- within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. We further direct that the respondents shall continue the applicants as Trainee Scientists till such consideration is completed. No costs.
OA-4361/2014
6. The facts of this O.A. are similar to the OAs mentioned above. The only difference is that the applicants herein were recruited pursuant to an advertisement issued on 23.06.2012. They were also recruited as Trainee Scientists and were promised a consolidated amount of Rs.34650 p.m. They were also promised consideration for absorption in CSIR as Scientists in PB-3 with Grade Pay of Rs.6600/- provided they complete the academic programme with distinction. However, before they could be considered for absorption in CSIR, their services as Trainee Scientists were discontinued and they were informed that there was no provision in CSRAP Rules for extension of tenure of Trainee Scientists beyond a period of two years. Thus, while the applicants of earlier OAs were considered for absorption as Scientists and even issued appointment letters, the applicants herein were never so considered and their services as Trainee Scientists were discontinued by the impugned order dated 19.09.2014. They have, therefore, approached this Tribunal seeking the following relief:-
(a) Direct the Respondent to appoint the Applicants as Scientist in Pay Band-3 of the Govt. of India in pay scale of Rs.15600-39100 with Grade Pay of Rs.6660/- plus other allowance as applicable as per the advertisement dated 25.5.2012.
(b) Declare invalid the provisions of the Appointment Letters issued to the Applicants, insofar as they are inconsistent with the terms of the Advertisement dated 25th May 2012 and the Amended CSRAP Rules 2001.
(c) Quash the letter No. 1-1 01(11 (PGRPE)/2013-RAB) dated 19th September, 2014 issued by CSIR to the laboratories.
(d) Quash all consequential actions taken pursuant to the letter No. 1-1 01(11 (PGRPE)/2013-PAB) dated 19th September, 2014.
(e) Pass such further order (s) as this Honble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.
7. The applicants have argued that when they were engaged the entire procedure followed was similar to that laid down for appointment. Thus, Selection Committee comprising of a large number of Professors was constituted and its meetings were held on 20th and 21st July, 2012. Candidates were selected following the reservation policy with separate panels prepared for UR, OBC, SC and ST categories. The applicants have also argued that as per revised Rule 6.5.1 of CSRAP Rules the post of Trainee Scientist is a regular post in PB-3 with Grade Pay of Rs.5400/-. The applicants have claimed that they were duly recruited Trainee Scientists and they had a right to continue in the aforesaid post just like a regular appointee.
8. As far as the reply of the respondents is concerned, this has been dealt with in the earlier part of this judgment. The respondents had stated the circumstances in which the services of the applicants were discontinued following a complaint in which it was alleged that the appointments have been made in violation of the CSRAP Rules.
9. We have considered the submissions of both sides and have perused the material on record. It is obvious from the manner in which the applicants were recruited that the respondents themselves were not clear whether they were recruiting candidates for an academic programme or for appointment in CSIR. The process followed by them was also mixture of the two. Nevertheless, it is clear that they did intend to consider the selected candidates for absorption in CSIR as Scientists on completing their academic programme with distinction. They had also given extension to 2011 batch recruits till such consideration was completed.
10. In our opinion, there is no need to adopt a different yardstick for the applicants herein. The complaint received was only against consideration for appointment as Scientists without issue of an open advertisement, as provided under Rule 6.5 of CSRAP Rules. However, the right of the applicants to be considered for appointment cannot be denied.
10.1 In the case of applicants of OA-2343/2014, OA-2445/2014 & OA-3727/2014 the respondents had themselves given extension of tenure to them till they were considered for absorption in CSIR. There is no reason to treat the applicants herein differently. Their tenure as Trainee Scientists should also be extended accordingly.
11. We, therefore, dispose of this O.A. and quash the letter dated 19.09.2014 by which the services of the applicants have been discontinued. We further direct that the respondents shall consider the applicants for absorption in CSIR as Scientists in PB-3 with Grade Pay of Rs.6600/- in accordance with CSRAP Rules. Till such consideration is completed, their tenure as Trainee Scientists shall be extended. This will be done within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. No costs.
(Shekhar Agarwal) (G. George Paracken) Member (A) Member (J) /Vinita/