Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Ravi Saini vs Staff Selection Commission (Ssc) on 3 September, 2024
1
OA No.1485/2024
Item No. 39 (C-4)
Central Administrative Tribunal
Principal Bench
New Delhi
OA No.1485/2024
This the 03 day of September, 2024
rd
Hon'ble Mrs. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J)
Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member(A)
Ravi Saini House No. 27/236,
Shakti Nagar, Gali No. 5 Bahadurgarh
Dist- Jhajjar, Haryana - 124507
..Applicant
(By Advocates: Mr. Raj Kumar)
Versus
1. The Commissioner of Police, Delhi Police, New Delhi -
110001
2. The Chairman Staff Selection Commission CGO Complex
New Delhi-110003
3. The Director General, Border Security Force Lodhi Road,
New Delhi - 110003
... Respondents
(By Advocate:Ms. Neelima Rathore, Mr. Rajesh Chauhan)
2
OA No.1485/2024
Item No. 39 (C-4)
O R D E R(Oral)
Hon'ble Mrs. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member(J) A The present OA has been filed by the applicant seeking the following relief:-
"A. To direct the respondents No. 1 to give appointment to the applicant for the post of Sub Inspector (Executive) Delhi Police with antedate seniority and other service benefits wef 15 Sep 23.
B. To direct the respondent No. 1 to give necessary appointment order, if required create a supernumerary post for such period as required to give the appointment to the applicant, he is eligible for.
C. To pass any other order or direction in favour of Applicant which may be deemed just and proper under the facts and circumstances of this case in the interest of justice."
2. The facts in brief are that the applicant is an Ex- Serviceman (ESM) who was employed earlier with the Indian Navy. After his discharge on 31.08.2023, he applied for the post of Sub-Inspector (exe.) in the Ex- Serviceman (General) category, advertised by the SSC. The SSC declared he was selected in the ESM General category for the post of Sub-Inspector in Delhi Police. A provisional offer of appointment was issued to him, however, during document verification it came to light that the applicant had been selected against the ESM - UR (Special category), which is meant for commandoes. The applicant submits that 3 OA No.1485/2024 Item No. 39 (C-4) he had applied in the General category only. He did not apply under the special category since he is not qualified for the same. Under the special category completion of Commando course is a must, since the applicant does possess the same is not eligible for the same.
3. Thereafter, the applicant has submitted several representations pointing out the fact that in his application form and at every other stage he has mentioned that he belongs to the ESM - General Category rather than the Special Category. The SSC on noting the above and after some delay has issued the revised result dated 16.02.2024. In the revised result the applicant was shifted from Ex-Serviceman Special Category to Ex-serviceman General Category.Now the Delhi Police is required to take further steps and issue an offer of appointment to the applicant in his category
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of Delhi Police relying upon the counter affidavit states that during this intervening period other candidates who were also vying for this post have been appointed 4 OA No.1485/2024 Item No. 39 (C-4) and as such, there are no vacancies available under the General category to adjust the applicant. She submits that although posts in the Sub-Inspector (Special category) are vacant, however, the General category posts stand filled up. She further submits that similar mistake has been committed by the SSC in respect of four other candidates. The names and the OA filed by the four other candidates have been reproduced in the table below:-
5. The aforementioned candidates had approached the Tribunal in three separate OAs and also the High Court in one Writ Petition. All these applications have 5 OA No.1485/2024 Item No. 39 (C-4) been disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider their places as per their category and their documents in case the vacancies are there.to
6. At this stage, learned counsel for the applicant submits that out of the four candidates only one is falling within the cut-off whereas the rest of the three have not achieved the marks in merit. Whereas, the applicant in the instant OA is a topper in his category and is well within his right to seek appointment.
7. Considering the above, we are of the opinion that it is because of the botch up by the SSC, such a situation has arisen. It is not expected from the Commission which is the authority to conduct recruitment for various posts to the Central Government,to commit these kinds of mistakes as these mistakes cause heavy loss to the aspirants.
8. We believe that neither the applicant nor the other candidates are at fault since they have applied in their correct category, but because of the mismanagement at the SSC level this situation has arisen. It is now left to the Courts to find a way out of this so that the proper justice is meted out. 6 OA No.1485/2024 Item No. 39 (C-4)
9. In view of the above the present OA is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider the case of the applicant for appointment as Sub- Inspector in the ESM (General Category) as per his merits. The SSC is also directed to issue the merit list of the ESM (General Category), declaring the marks achieved by the applicant as well as the other four candidates mentioned by the respondents i.e. Delhi Police. Thereafter, the respondents are directed to take action in accordance with the merit of each candidate within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.
10. The OA is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. No costs.
(Dr. Sumeet Jerath) (Harvinder Kaur Oberoi)
Member(A) Member(J)
/ss/