Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Mr. Dushyant vs Union Of India on 24 January, 2013
Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench, New Delhi O.A.No.307/2013 Thursday, this the 24th day of January 2013 Honble Mr. G George Paracken, Member (J) Honble Mrs. Manjulika Gautam, Member (A)
1. Mr. Dushyant S/o Mr. Brijvir Singh, All India Radio Broadcasting Professionals Association General Secretary, Regd. Off: D-369, SF, Fali No.14, Laxmi Nagar, New Delhi 110092.
2. Mr. Ayub Husain Khan S/o Late Mr. Atique, Aged about 49 years, R/o 222/2, Zakir Nagar, New Delhi 110025.
.. Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Sanjoy Ghose) Versus
1. Union of India, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, A Wing, Shastri Bhawan, Dr. Rajendra Prasad Raod, New Delhi 110001.
Through its Director General
2. Prasar Bharati Secretariat, (Broadcasting Corporation of India), 2nd Flolor, PTI Building Sansad Marg, New Delhi 110001.
3. All India Radio, Akashvani Bhavan, Parliament Street, New Delhi 110001.
Through its Director General.
4. All India Radio, Broadcasting House, Delhi Station, Parliament Street, New Delhi 110001.
Through its Station Director ..Respondents O R D E R (ORAL) G George Paracken, M(J):
The first applicant in this case is All India Radio Broadcasting Professional Association and the second applicant is one of the member of the 1st applicants association. They have filed this Original Application seeking the following reliefs:-
a) Direct the Respondents to formulate concrete policies and guidelines in respect of the service conditions and other issues raised by the Applicants/members from time to time and set out in Para 5.2 of the Application.
b) To dispose of the various representations dated 16.09.2011, 10.10.2011, 07.02.2012, 23.04.2012, 02.03.2012 and 03.10.2012 made by the Applicant association and its members considering all the demands raised in those representations.
c) To restrain the Respondents for restoring to any fresh recruitment of casual RJ Presenters without first:
1. determining the sanctioned/required strength and vacancies of RJ Presenters.
2. Formulating the service conditions and policies to address the working and appointment/absorption of RJ Presenters.
3. Ensuring that the work allocation of the existing RJ Presenters is in no manner prejudicially affected.
2. Before filing this OA the applicants have made several representations to the respondents. They are dated 16.09.2011, 10.10.2011, 07.02.2012, 23.04.2012, 02.03.2012 and 03.10.2012.
3. In our considered view, the employees have a legitimate right to get their grievance redressed departmentally through representations and it is the bounden duty of the authorities to consider those representations within the four corners of the rules and regulations and dispose them of. Keeping them in the files and being silent on them is not the solution to any problem. In our considered opinion, the respondents ought to have considered and decided all the representations of the applicants and inform their decision in clear terms before they approached this Tribunal.
4. In view of the above position, we dispose of this OA at the admission stage itself with the direction to the respondents to consider the aforesaid representations of the applicants and dispose them of by a reasoned and speaking order till such time the respondents shall not proceed further with the proposed conducting of auditions for fresh appointments or engagement of casual RJ Presenters. If the reply to the representations of the applicants is not in their favour and if they are still aggrieved in the matter, they are at liberty to challenge the same through appropriate proceedings, if so advised. There shall be no order as to costs.
Order DASTI.
( Manjulika Gautam ) ( G George Paracken )
Member (A) Member (J)
/vb/