Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Kusum Lata vs Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi on 11 January, 2013
Central Administrative Tribunal
Principal Bench, New Delhi.
OA-979/2012
Reserved on : 09.01.2013.
Pronounced on:11.01.2013.
Honble Mr. G. George Paracken, Member (J)
Honble Mr. Shekhar Agarwal, Member (A)
1. Kusum Lata,
No.D-2879,
PIS No. 16990003
W/o Sh. S.L. Dangi,
R/o C-67, Harkesh Nagar,
Okhla, New Delhi.
2. Ms. Bernadette Lakra,No.D-2885
PIS No. 28863203
D/o Sh. Nicholas Lakra,
R/o Flat No.53, Sector 18-B,
Phase-II, MIG Flats, Dwarka,
New Delhi.
3. Mrs. Seema Singh, D-21,
PIS No. 16970002,
W/o late Sh. Abhay Singh,
R/o H.No. 829, Sector-3,
R.K. Puram, New Delhi.
4. Ms. Josepha Kujur, D-2886
PIS No. 28960033,
D/o Sh. Jowakim Kujur,
R/o Q.No. 7, Type-III,
Sarita Vihar Police Colony,
Opposite Apollo Hospital,
New Delhi.
5. Ms. Renu Yadav, D-2876
PIS No. 24960018
D/o Sh. Tek Chand Singh,
R/o H.No. E-275, Shastri Park,
East Babarpur, Shahdara,
Delhi.
6. Mrs. Pratibha Sharma, D-2873
PIS No. 27910040
W/o Sh. P.P. Sharma,
R/o A-3/3, PS Defence Colony,
New Delhi. . Applicants
(through Sh. S.C. Sagar, Advocate)
Versus
1. Govt. of NCT of Delhi
Players Building, Delhi Secretariat,
New Delhi-110002.
(Through its Chief Secretary)
2. The Commissioner of Police,
Delhi Police,
PHQ, New Delhi-110002.
3. Sushma Tyagi,
W/o Sh. Satish Kumar,
R/o G-6, Police Station,
Lajpat Nagar-III,
New Delhi-110024
Posted at:
Police Station Sangam Vihar,
South East District.
4. Smt. Roslin Poonam Minz,
W/o Eric Minz,
R/o Q.No.14, Type-III,
Rajendra Nagar, Police Colony,
Posted at:
P.S. Nabi Karim
Central Distt.
5. Smt. Sharda Devi,
W/o Sh. Umesh Chand Thakur,
R/o A-40, Ramprastha Colony,
Delhi-UP Border, Ghaziabad
Posted at:
DCP Office, East Distt.,
Mandavali, Fazalpur,
Delhi.
6. Smt. Kamlesh,
W/o lat Sh. Rajpal Singh,
R/o G-I, Police Station,
Moti Nagar, New Delhi
Posted at:
P.S. Moti Nagar, West Distt. . Respondents
(through Mrs. Renu George, Advocate for official respondents and
Sh. Nilansh Gaur, Advocate for private respondents.
O R D E R
Mr. Shekhar Agarwal, Member (A) The applicants have sought the following relief:-
(a) set aside the Seniority Lists dated 18.3.2011 and 16.1.2012 and direct the Respondents to re-fix/correct both the Seniority Lists as per provisions of the Delhi Police Rules, 1980 or any other Standing Orders/instructions.
also strike off seniority of those persons shown at Sr. No. 54 to 117 in the impugned Seniority Lists dated 18.3.2011 and 16.1.2012 who are much junior to the Applicants.
draw up the separate Seniority List vis-`-vis direct recruits/Applicants and adhoc/officiating promotees to ensure the lawful rights of the applicants/direct recruits in accordance with existing Rules.
Direct the Respondents to draw up the separate seniority lists of the Inspectors shown at Sr.No.1 to 53 in the Seniority Lists dated 18.3.2011 and 16.1.2012.
Set aside the impugned order dated 18.1.2012 passed by the Respondents.
2. The applicants have stated that they had joined as Women Sub-Inspector (WSI) (Executive)(E) as direct recruits on the basis of the examination held in 1997 and 1998. However, some of the WSI (E) promotees were placed above them in the seniority list. Subsequently, vide order dated 08.06.1999 these promotees were reverted back by the respondent No.1. OA-1556/1998 was filed by one of them seeking regularization of their ad hoc promotion to the grade of WSI(E) from the date of their ad hoc promotion. This Tribunal decided that O.A. vide their order dated 10.08.2000. The applicants were not party in that O.A. On 05.02.2001, the respondents cancelled their earlier order of regular promotion of the promotee Women Assistant Sub-Inspectors WASIs(E) and ante dated their promotion vide their Order No. 6796 and 6797 respectively. Since the applicants were not acquainted with the judgment dated 10.08.2000 of this Tribunal, they sought correction in the inter-se-seniority between direct recruits and promotees. This Tribunal on 06.12.2010 directed the respondents to examine the entire issue of inter-se-seniority between direct recruits and promotees. In pursuance of these directions, the respondents published a provisional integrated seniority list on 18.03.2011 and invited objection on the same from all concerned. The applicants also made their individual representations against the seniority list in April, 2011. The applicants filed OA-3157/2011 regarding non-disposal of their representations, which was disposed of on 02.09.2011 directing the respondents to consider the representations of the applicants. On18.01.2012, the respondents passed the impugned order fixing inter-se-seniority of direct recruits and promotees. The present Original Application has been preferred against this seniority list.
3. The respondents in their reply have stated that on 21.01.1995 58 WASIs (E) were promoted on ad hoc basis subject to their passing of Upper School Course. They made representation seeking exemption from the said course on the ground that they had already undergone initial training of one year. However, decision on their representation did not materialize and they were deputed for training in Upper School Course w.e.f. 17.08.1998. Aggrieved with this decision, they filed OA-1556/1998 (Saraswati Thapa & Ors. Vs. UOI & Ors.) seeking exemption from Upper School Course and regularization of their promotion w.e.f. 30.11.1995. During the pendency of the said O.A., with the approval of Honble Lt. Governor, Delhi, it was decided to depute them for refresher/re-orientation course for a period of four weeks instead of Upper School Course and after successful completion of the same they were regularized in the rank of SI (E) w.e.f. 08.06.1999 vide order dated 10.06.1999. However, in pursuance of directions of this Tribunal dated 10.08.2000 given in OA-1556/1998, the promotees were regularized in the rank of SI(E) w.e.f. 30.11.1995 after canceling their previous order in this regard. The respondents have further contended that all the applicants of the present O.A. joined Delhi Police as direct recruits after the regularization date of the promotees SIs i.e. 30.11.1995. Thus, they cannot claim seniority above the promotee Executives since they were not even in service on the date from which the promotees have been regularized.
4. We have heard the learned counsel for both sides and have gone through the records. We find that while fixing the inter-se-seniority the respondents had invited representation from all aggrieved persons and had taken final decision after disposing of the same. Thus, an opportunity had been provided to the applicants also for representing their case. Through the O.A. in question, the relief sought for is to quash all the seniority lists published by the respondents and draw up separate seniority list of direct recruits and officiating promotees. However, a perusal of the Delhi Police (Appointment & Recruitment) Rules, 1980 would reveal that there is no provision for maintaining separate list of promotees and direct recruits. In fact, Rules clearly provide integrated seniority list and the manner in which such integrated seniority list is to be published is also provided for. Considering that the promotees were regularized w.e.f. 30.11.1995 they have been rightly placed above direct recruits who have joined service after this date. As such, we do not find any reason to interfere in this inter-se-seniority. There is no merit in the contention of the applicants. Accordingly, the present Original Application is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.
(Shekhar Agarwal) (G. George Paracken)
Member (A) Member (J)
/Vinita/