Central Administrative Tribunal - Chandigarh
Smt. Neeru Dougall W/O Ranjeev Dougall vs Union Of India on 20 July, 2012
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
CHANDIGARH BENCH
ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO. 666 -CH of 2011
Chandigarh, this the 20th day of July , 2012
CORAM:HONBLE MR. JUSTICE S.D.ANAND, MEMBER(J)
HONBLE MR.RANBIR SINGH, MEMBER(A)
1. Smt. Neeru Dougall w/o Ranjeev Dougall, working as Private Secretary, Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh.
APPLICANT
BY ADVOCATE: SHRI R.S. BAINS
VERSUS
1. Union of India, through the Secretary, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances & Pensions, Department of Personnel & Training, New Delhi.
2. Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi through its Principal Registrar.
3. Smt. O.S. Nadar, working as a Private Secretary, Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi, through its Principal Registrar.
4. Smt. Soma Banyopadhyay, working as Private Secretary, Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi, through its Principal Registrar.
5. Shri N.S.N. Rao, working as a Private Secretary, Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi, through its Principal Registrar.
6. Smt. Indrani Nath, working as a Private Secretary, Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi, through its Principal Registrar.
7. Shri Naresh Kumar Ahuja, working as a Private Secretary, Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi, through its Principal Registrar.
8. Sh. Harish Chandra son of Shri Murli Yadav, working as a Private Secretary, Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh.
9. Shri S. Poovaraj, Private Secretary, Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi, through its Principal Registrar.
10. Shri S. Rangarajan, SO, Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi, through its Principal Registrar.
11. Shri V.K. Sinha, SO, Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi, through its Principal Registrar.
12. Shri A.K. Dave, SO, Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi, through its Principal Registrar.
13. Shri B.R. Kulkarni, SO, Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi, through its Principal Registrar.
14. Shri M.L. Samaria, SO, Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi, through its Principal Registrar.
15. Shri L.R. Choudhary, SO/CO, Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi, through its Principal Registrar.
16. Sh. D.R. Panchal, SO/CO, Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi, through its Principal Registrar.
17. Sh. S.K. Mukhopadhyay, SO/CO, Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi, through its Principal Registrar.
18. Smt. S.G. Thakurta, SO/CO, Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi, through its Principal Registrar.
19. Sh. B.K. Juneja, SO/CO, Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi, through its Principal Registrar.
RESPONDENTS
BY ADVOCATE: SHRI DEEPAK AGNIHOTRI FOR RESPONDENTS 1&2
SHRI V.K. SHARMA FOR RESPONDENT NO.8
( Orders reserved on 18.7.2012.
ORDER
HONBLE MR. RANBIR SINGH, MEMBER(A):-
This case relates to the seniority list of Private Secretaries of the Central Administrative Tribunal.
2. As per the Original Application, the applicant had submitted representations, dated 12.1.2010, (Annexure A-17), dated 8.12.2010, (Annexure A-19) and dated 6.4.2011 ( Annexure A-20) addressed to Respondent no.2 relating to her claim for promotion based on seniority to which no clear reply has been furnished. The substantive relief sought in this O.A. is as follows:-
i) Issuance an appropriate direction or order for the correction in the seniority list after accepting the claim of the applicant for seniority in the cadre of Private Secretary w.e.f. 19.9.2001, the day she joined the Chandigarh Bench as Private Secretary in the pay scale of Private Secretary will all consequential reliefs including grade pay from the day she is entitled for seniority and other benefits.
ii) Issuance of an appropriate order or direction for accepting the claim of the applicant of seniority over those respondents who have joined the cadre of Private Secretaries after regular absorption of the applicant in the cadre of Private Secretarys w.e.f. 19.9.2003 and whose continuous service is less than that of the applicant in the cadre of the Private Secretary.
3. Joint reply statements have been furnished by Respondents No. 1 & 2, by Respondent no. 5 & 7 and separately by respondent no.8. Respondents 1 & 2 have in their written statement pointed out that the applicants representation dated 12.1.2010 (Annexure A-17) was considered and rejected at the level of Chairman, Central Administrative Tribunal. Applicant has filed a copy of a letter dated 9.3.2010 (Annexure -18 ) of respondent no.2, whereby her representation was rejected. Regarding representations dated 8.12.2010 (Annexure A-19) and dated 6.4.2011(Annexure A-20) the applicant has filed a copy of letter dated 4.5.2011 (Annexure A-21), whereby respondent no.2 had intimated that her representation dated 9.12.2010 would be examined and considered as and when seniority list is finalized.
4. We have seen that the applicants representation dated 12.1.2010 (Annexure A-17) is against the seniority list dated 22/25-2.2008 and representation dated 8.12.2010 (Annexure A-19) and representation dated 6.4.2011( Annexure A-20) relate to seniority list dated 24.11.2010. The respondents 1 & 2 in their written statement have pointed out that the seniority list issued on 22nd February, 2008 was quashed by the Honble High court in the matter of Sh. A.K. Jha. Therefore, the draft seniority list was again issued on 24.11.2010. That seniority list is yet to be issued on finalization. The respondent no. 1 & 2 have also pointed out that a reply was sent to the applicant on 4.5.2011, stating that since the seniority list in the grade of SO/CO/PS is yet to be finalized and that the objections raised by the applicant in her representation dated 8.12.2010 would be examined and considered as and when seniority list is finalized. The applicant has stated in the O.A. that the seniority list of Private Secretaries has been finalized and circulated on 29.11.2010 (A-16). However, we find that it (Annexure A-16) is only a non-certified typed copy, without a covering letter.
5. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the pleadings. The learned counsel have taken us through the instructions of Govt. of India, the rules regarding fixations of seniority list and the relevant case law. However, considering that the representation dated 8.12.2010 (Annexure A-19) of the applicant has not yet been decided by the competent authority, the stage is not ripe for us to go into the nitty-gritty of the matter, and it would be appropriate if the competent authority is directed to dispose of the applicants pending representations in a time bound manner.
6. Therefore, this O.A. is disposed of by directing the Respondent no.2 to dispose of representation dated 8.12.2010 (Annexure A-19) and representation dated 6.4.2011 (Annexure A-20) of the applicant by passing a reasoned and speaking order under intimation to the applicant within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The applicant is at liberty to approach this Tribunal if she is still aggrieved.
7. No costs.
(RANBIR SINGH) MEMBER(A) (JUSTICE S.D.ANAND) MEMBER(J) Dated: July 20 , 2012 `SK Draft order in O.A. NO. 666-ch-2011 (Smt. Neeru Dougall Vs. UOI & Ors) for consideration please.
(RANBIR SINGH) MEMBER (A) Honble Mr. Justice S.D. Anand, Member (J) 1 (OA No. 666-CH-2011 )