Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Ms. Geeta Arya vs Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi Through The Chief ... on 14 February, 2013
Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench, New Delhi O.A.No.545/2013 Thursday, this the 14th day of February 2013 Honble Shri G George Paracken, Member (J) Honble Shri Shekhar Agarwal, Member (A) Ms. Geeta Arya D/o Shri Teeka Ram R/o A-7E D.D.A., Flats Munirka, New Delhi-87 ... Applicant (By Advocate: Shri M.K. Bhardwaj) Versus 1. Govt. of NCT of Delhi through the Chief Secretary 5th Floor, Delhi Sachivalaya, New Delhi. 2. Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board Through its Secretary Govt. of NCT of Delhi, F-18, Karkardooma, Institutional Area, Delhi-92. 3. Municipal Corporation of Delhi, Through its Director, Local Bodies, Dr. S.P.M. Civic Centre, Minto Road, New Delhi-110002. ..Respondents O R D E R (ORAL)
Shri G George Paracken:
The applicant was a candidate for the post of Teacher Primary in Municipal Corporation of Delhi. She had earlier filed CWP No.10366/2009 before the Honble High Court of Delhi which was transferred to this Tribunal and registered as TA 23/2011. The said TA was allowed vide order dated 30.01.2012 and its operative part is as under:-
12. We, therefore, direct the respondents to examine the cases of each of the applicants and if they come within the purview of the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court in Dr. Jamuna Kurup (supra), they shall be given age relaxation and those who fulfil that condition and otherwise found suitable shall be given appointment as Teacher (Primary) with all consequential benefits except back wage at the earliest and in any case within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No order as to costs.
2. Thereafter, the applicant was expected to be appointed as a Teacher Primary. However, the respondents have issued the impugned Result Notice No. 184 dated 04.06.2012 wherein the respondents have stated that the Applicants result was not declared since she did not fulfill the eligibility condition of Recruitment Rules for the post of having 50% marks in Senior Secondary Examination whereas she had obtained only 46% being SC Migrant, the benefit of relaxation of 5% marks in pass percentage in Senior Secondary Examination was available to her in the light of the judgment dated 4.8.2009 of Honble Supreme Court of India passed in Civil Appeal No.5092 of 2009 arising out of Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil No(s) 24327/05 Subhash Chandra & Anr. Vs. DSSSB & Ors. with WP(C) No. 507 of 2008 Sarv Rural and Urban Welfare Society Vs. U.O.I. and Ors.
3. The applicant challenged the aforesaid Result Notice on the ground that the order of the Honble High Court of Delhi vide its Full Bench judgment dated 12.09.2012 in WP(C) No. 5390/2012 Deepak Kumar and Ors. Vs. Distt and Session Judge have removed the aforesaid obstacle. The operative part of the said order reads as under:-
67. In view of the above discussion WP No.5390/2010; WP No.3223/2011, 3278/2011, 7717/2010 are allowed. The third, fourth and fifth Petitioners in W.P. 1205/2010 are entitled to succeed; the said petition is allowed to that extent. The said petition is dismissed, as far as the first and second writ petitioners are concerned. For the reasons mentioned earlier, W.P. (C) No.816/2011, 1713/2011 7878/2010 and 8368/2010 are dismissed. W.P. (C) No.1513/2011 is allowed, and the impugned order of the Central Administrative Tribunal is set aside. Consequently, in WP No.5390/2010; WP No.3223/2011 3278/2011, 7717/2010 as well as WP 1205/2010 (as far as it concerns the third, fourth and fifth Petitioners) the District Judge, and the Govt. of NCT are hereby directed to ensure that the petitioners cases for appointment to LDC are processed, and they are treated as scheduled caste or scheduled tribe candidates, entitled to be considered as such, and appropriate orders made in that regard. This exercise shall be concluded within six weeks from today.
68. Having regard to the public importance of the questions which have arisen and have been dealt with, in relation to the interpretation of Articles 16, 341 and 342 of the Constitution of India, the Court hereby grants certificates to appeal to the unsuccessful parties, under Article 134 A of the Constitution of India, to appeal to the Supreme Court.
69. There shall be no order on costs.
4. The learned counsel for the Applicant has also pointed out that this Tribunal has considered the same issue again in OA No. 844/2011 Shri Parveen Kumar Vs. The Chairman, DSSSB decided on 20.12.2012. The operative part of the said order also reads as under:-
5. In view of the above, we have no hesitation in holding that the principle applied in aforesaid OA No.4434/2011, would apply in the present case also. Consequently, we set aside Annexure-1 letter dated 23.12.2010 and direct the respondents to treat the applicant as an SC category candidate for the purpose of selection in question and to consider him for appointment to the post of Driver in DTC notionally w.e.f. the same date from which the other SC candidates, who appeared along with him for the said selection has been appointed, if he, otherwise, fulfills all other criteria meant for the selection to the said post. He will be entitled for all consequential benefits except back-wages. The aforesaid directions shall be complied with, by the DSSSB within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and thereafter, within one month, the DTC shall also appoint the applicant as Driver, as in the case of similarly placed candidates.
6. The OA is disposed of in terms of the aforesaid directions. There shall be no order as to costs.
5. We have heard the learned counsel for the applicant and perused the documents available on record. In our considered view, there is no dispute that the applicants case is covered by the aforesaid judgment of the Honble High Court of Delhi followed by the order of this Tribunal. We, therefore, direct the respondents to consider the case of the applicant in the light of the aforesaid judgment of the Honble High Court/order of this Tribunal and if the applicants case is found covered by them, she shall also be extended the same benefits as has been extended to her batch mates, except back wages. The aforesaid directions shall be complied with, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs.
( Shekhar Agarwal) (G. George Paracken)
Member (A) Member (J)
/vb/