Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Sujeet Kumar vs Municipal Corporation Of Delhi on 10 May, 2012
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA 3989/2011 New Delhi this the 10th day of May, 2012 HONBLE MR. G. GEORGE PARACKEN, MEMBER (J) HONBLE MR. SUDHIR KUMAR, MEMBER (A) 1. Sujeet Kumar, S/o Sh. Parmanand Kumar, R/o 75/4, Gali No. 1-D, B-Block, Baba Colony, Burari, Delhi-110084. 2. Sanjeeda Begum W/o Sh. Shamsuddin, R/o 181, Hauz Rani, Delhi-110017. 3. Neena Sharma, D/o P.C. Sharma, R/o 3265-A, Ram Nagar Extn., Mandoli, Delhi-110032. Applicants. (By Advocate Shri M.R. Faroqui) Versus 1. Municipal Corporation of Delhi, Through its Commissioner, Town Hall Chandni Chowk, Delhi-110006. 2. Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board (DSSSB), Through its Chairman, FC-18, Institutional Area, Karkardooma, Delhi. 3. Govt. of NCT, Through its Chief Secretary, New Secretariat, I.P. Estate, New Delhi. Respondents. (By Advocates Shri B.N.P Pathak for Respondents 1 and 2, Shri R.K. Jain for Respondent No.3) O R D E R (ORAL)
Shri G. George Paracken:
The applicants are teachers presently working on contract basis with the Respondent No. 1, namely, the Municipal Corporation of Delhi. The Respondent No. 2, namely, Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board (`DSSSB for short) has issued advertisement No. 004/2009 for recruitment of Assistant Teacher (Primary) vide Post Code Nos. 69/09 (Urdu), 70/09 (General) and 71/09 (General) in the Schools of Respondents 1 and 3 respectively. The applicants have applied for the aforesaid post in terms of Post Codes 70/09 and 71/09. Their case is that they are entitled for age relaxation as already granted by the Lt. Governor of Delhi to similarly placed persons vide order dated 25.05.2010. They have, therefore, sought the following reliefs/interim relief in this Original Application:
Reliefs:
i) pass an order to give the relaxation in age limit and weightage in experience in selection process for the recruitment of Assistant Teacher (Primary) in the corrigendum/notice dated 13.9.2011 in the event of advertisement no.004/09;
pass an order thereby directing the respondent no.2 to implement the order no.F.No.13/28/UD/MB/2010 dated 25.5.2010 whereby the Lt. Governor was pleased to give age relaxation to contract teachers, who are engaged by MCD/respondent No.1 for appearing in the competitive examination of the post of Assistant Teacher (Primary) conducted by DSSSB/respondent no.2;
pass an order thereby directing the respondents to give age relaxation to all contract teachers of 593 working/teaching with the school of respondent no.1 as Primary Teachers;
Any other/further order (s) instruction (s) and direction (s) as this Honble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, may also kindly be passed in favour of the applicants and against the respondents.
Interim Relief:
Pending final disposal of O.A. the applicants pray that this Honble Tribunal may be pleased to:
i) pass an order to stay the operation of corrigendum/notice dated 13.9.2011 in relation to the post code 70/09 and 71/09 in the event of advertisement no.004/09, in the interest of justice.
2. In this regard, they have also relied upon the judgment of the Honble High Court of Delhi in WP (C) No. 1641/2011 DSSSB Vs. Preeti Rathi and Ors., the relevant part of which reads as under:
11. After hearing the counsels for the parties, we are of the view that impugned judgment rendered by the learned Tribunal does not call for any interference though we have our own reasons for arriving at the same conclusion and each of which reasons is independent and sufficient to sustain the order.
12. In the first instance, we may point out that as per the amended Recruitment Rules as also the advertisement issued by the petitioner, the age limit of 27 years is relaxable up to 45 years of age in respect of departmental candidates. The provision in this behalf stipulates as under:- "Age Limit: 20-27 years (Relaxable in case of SC/ST/OBC/PH/Ex-Serviceman as per Government of India instructions issued from time to time). Relaxation in upper age limit available to:- SC/ST-05 years, OBC-03 years, PH & SC/ST-15 years and PH & OBC - 13 years, Departmental Candidates upto 45 years of age are eligible."
13. In the rules, nowhere the expression "departmental candidates" has been defined. It has to be, in these circumstances, assigned natural connotation. A departmental candidate would be the candidate who is not an outsider but is already working in the concerned department namely MCD in the instant case. Admittedly the respondents are working in MCD as Primary Teachers on contract basis and one has to assign practical meaning to the aforesaid terminology and we are of the considered opinion that the respondents shall be treated as departmental candidates for the purpose of appointment to the post of Primary Teachers on regular basis when they are already working in the same post on ad-hoc basis for the last ten years. Reference may be made to UPSC v. Dr. Jamuna Kurup (2008) 11 SCC 10 where the expression "employees of MCD" in the advertisement granting age relaxation with respect to recruitment to the post of Ayurvedic Vaids was held to include both permanent or temporary, regular or short term contractual or ad hoc employees of the MCD. Accordingly those appointed on contract basis were held to be employees of MCD and entitled to age relaxation. The earlier judgment in UPSC v Girish Jayanti Lal Vaghela (2006) 2 SCC 482 relating to Government employees was held to be not applicable to the expression "employees of MCD". We see no reason why the said dicta of the Supreme Court be not applied to the present situation also.
14. Even in those matters whether cases of ad-hoc/casual/contract employees come up for consideration for regular appointment, there has always been a practice of giving age relaxation. In many judgments rendered by the Apex Court as well as this Court such relaxation is provided and the relevant aspect which is to be kept in mind is that at the time of initial appointment on contract/casual basis the incumbent was within the age limit and was not overage. If that is so, to the extent of service rendered by such an employee, the benefit thereof has to be given. If the relaxation of almost 10 years is to be given to the respondents for having worked for this period, in that case also they would fall within the prescribed age limit.
15. There is yet another reason not to interfere with the impugned order. In the present case the respondents herein had filed an OA for declaration that they were entitled to be considered for the post of Primary Teachers. These teachers are to be appointed in MCD. MCD is the prospective employer which had sent its requisition to the petitioner herein namely Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board (DSSSB). After the judgment rendered by the Tribunal, MCD has not challenged, rather accepted the same. If MCD has no objection for consideration of the case of these respondents on merits for appointment on regular basis, we see no reason why the petitioner which is but a recruitment agency, should have any such objection.
16. In view thereof, we dismiss this writ petition as devoid of any merits; at the same time we clarify that the only effect of the order of the learned Tribunal or this judgment would be that the respondents would be entitled to be considered for the post of Primary Teachers on regular basis, whether they are able to get selected or not on their merits is altogether different question which has not been gone into by us.
3. When this case was listed on 09.11.2011, this Tribunal has granted the interim relief in favour of the applicants directing the respondents to provisionally allow them to appear in the competitive examination for the posts of Assistant Teacher (Primary) subject to their fulfillment of all qualifications except the age limit. There was also a direction not to declare the results without the leave of this court.
4. The respondent MCD in its reply has submitted that the applicants are squarely covered by the aforesaid judgment of the Honble High Court of Delhi in Preeti Rathis case (supra).
5. In view of the above position, we allow this O.A and grant the aforesaid reliefs sought by the applicants. Consequently, if the applicants are found qualified in the competitive examination for the posts of Assistant Teacher (Primary) already held by the DSSSB, their results shall be published and if they are found eligible, they shall be appointed to the aforesaid posts in accordance with the rules. There shall be no order as to costs.
(Sudhir Kumar) ( G. George Paracken ) Member (A) Member (J) SRD