Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Alok Vijayant vs National Technical Research ... on 5 December, 2018
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
PRINCIPAL BENCH
OA-663/2015
MA-4683/2018
MA-4684/2018
New Delhi, this the 05th day of December, 2018
Hon'ble Mr. Justice L. Narasimha Reddy, Chairman
Hon'ble Ms. Aradhana Johri, Member (A)
Alok Vijayant, Director, NTRO,
Aged about 44 years,
s/o late Sh. Krishna Avtar Singh,
R/o H-74, Upper Ground Floor,
Sector 18, Rohini, New Delhi. ... Applicant
(through Sh. Sonal Jain)
Versus
1. The Chairman,
National Technical Research Organisation(NTRO)
Government of India, Block-3,
Old JNU Campus,
New Delhi-110067.
2. Controller of Administration (COA),
National Technical Research Organisation (NTRO)
Block-3, Old JNU Campus,
New Delhi-110067. ... Respondents
(through Sh. Hanu Bhaskar)
2 OA-663/15
ORDER(ORAL)
Hon'ble Mr. Justice L. Narasimha Reddy, Chairman The applicant was recruited as Manager in the RBI through the process of direct recruitment. He is said to be specialist in the field of management, cyber finance etc. The National Technical Research Organisation (NTRO) appointed the applicant as Deputy Director, on deputation on 16.03.2005. Thereafter, he was permanently absorbed in that organisation. He was appointed as Director, in Pay Band-4 with Grade Pay of Rs. 8700/- through an order dated 10.06.2009.
2. This OA is filed with a prayer to direct the respondents to consider the case of the applicant for promotion to the post of Joint Secretary in NTRO and with effect from 01.01.2012 by holding DPC and to extend him consequential benefits.
3. The applicant contends that he is entitled to be considered for promotion to the highest post in the organization but the respondents are deliberately not holding DPC.
3 OA-663/15
4. The respondents filed counter affidavit opposing the OA. According to them, there were only two wings in the organization when it was created, namely, Administrative and Scientific and thereafter, the Analytical wing was added, and that the applicant is part of the Analytical wing. It is also stated that the method of appointment to the post of Joint Secretary in the organization is totally different and the applicant is not entitled to be considered for the same.
5. We heard Sh. Sonal Jain, learned counsel for the applicant and Sh. Hanu Bhaskar, learned counsel for the respondents.
6. The applicant is under the impression that the post of Joint Secretary is a promotional one and that he is entitled to be considered for it. The NTRO functions under certain special circumstances. Its affairs cannot be compared with those of other ordinary organizations. We have perused the relevant rules that have been supplied to us in a sealed cover and we are convinced that the applicant, and the other officers in the other organization do not have any opportunity to be considered for promotion to the post of Joint Secretary. The method of appointment is totally different.
4 OA-663/15
7. We do not find any merit in the OA and the same is dismissed.
Pending MAs, if any, stand disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
(Aradhana Johri) (Justice L. Narasimha Reddy) Member (A) Chairman /ns/