Central Administrative Tribunal - Kolkata
Roheet Kr Chowrasia vs M/O Defence on 2 April, 2019
1 1 oa. 350.00409.2019 " "ra :! V t.r- i I-
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH, KOLKATA No. O.A. 350/00409/2019 Date of order: 2.4.2019 Present Hon'ble Ms. Bidisha Banerjee, Judicial Member Hon'ble Dr. Nandita Chatterjee, Administrative Member Roheet Kumar Chowrasia, Son of Shri Anup Kumar Chowrasia, Aged about 26 years, . i Residing at 305,.N.C. Koley Street, Ichapur, Post Office - Ichapur- Nawabganj District - 24 Parganas (North) i „ , i? -»■ V,„.
Pin - 743 K4;- "L. •! /i :■ ir.
Applicant
■fO % %■
'■k
■t
■'g* . V E R S U S --
•> & \ •: r ?•' ■
%
K
•ns
;«,T 4^Unibn'SJi^dW / / * ■ft*
> Vr
Sferwi^lplgljy^ecretal^, ^ 3>t
|f
mm
j
.;!■
:
1t
•■'il'Tii •.UgfKp
s
I*'-. 'H
«
V-,
"'Mr.
I
■ SpifthiBldfckf \
i ?• fif
firman Bhawan, \ •iosj S
ss4*.--
'Nlfj^efhi -|1 l6:.Qll|?5'4a r"'.y ..f..
r 3K. .ft'
.->• v«' y
s-.
■■v2. the Director General,r\ ... £■'
Jf Directorate General ofJQuality,As%u'rjahce (0GOA)
;*
Organization, -f"
'N.
^Government of India, ■ ' A £ ft-
S Ministry of Defenefe, •
✓
w:-'
-**•
^Room.No. 308-A, D^VVihg
' ^
•ii
'••*Sena Bhawan, Nirman BhaWan N ew'Del h i1- -1 T0r0l 1;
3. The Additional Director Quality Assurance (ARMTS) Directorate of Quality Assurance (Armts)/ Directorate of Quality Assurance (Arm-1),. Ministry of Defence, Department of Defence Production,. New Delhi, Room No. 136, South Block, . Nirman Bhawan, New Delhi -11.0 011.
4. The Senior Quality Assurance Officer, S! '7 \ 2 oa. 350.00409.2019 •v7.
v , 1 In the office of Senior Quality Assurance Establishment (Small Arms), , 7 . Ichapur-Nawabganj, District - 24 - Parganas (North), Pin-743 144.
\ 5. The Controller, Controllerate of Quality Assurance (SA) Ishapore, Post Office - Ichapur - Nawabganj, District - 24-Pargans (North), West Bengal, Pin-743 144.
*
v..'ri
% cl /y „ . Respondents
•'-k
r*'
h- •7;
For the Applicant^ X
For the Respondents
%
4
*c\ /i%, 7
w'tC-xWi//%■ '
fy"
- 1
JT:-
to? ■ft
l.
7i
-II !
I
*
.i--
Wr-. ^7 ■/ ft 1 \ \ ^ /rV-"
.y 91 £:sfea: #;
Administrative Tribunals A|t/1985 seeking'the^fpllo^iftg relief:- fr
l I I 777 £
X(a) To quashrfSf^7dr^set^aside?4h^irnpu§lfeS^ offiG^brQfer^ of cancellation1 of the
candidature^df thl.^appli(Sht for the^p^t"&'f%xamine^(SKilledT dated 14th Ma#h, 2015 issued by the S'enioNQuaTit^ Assurance Officer whefeoy anS wh'ere^nder without giving any^noticeipr^witliout giving any opportunity to the present agiMTcght, all on a^sudden the candidaturd\of tfie".applicant, has been canceljed^nd ali.o\fieappointment of the applicant for the post of Examiner-(Skilled).har1Been canceHed being Annexure A-10 of this original application. Ky . - ^ f J V ............................f ■•ft ✓ 4?
■'w J?'
(b) To pass an appropriate order^directing upon the^respondent authority to restore the appointment bithe pres'ent.applicant to the^post-df Exarninef"(Skilled) in terms of the appointment order dated 14lh FeE>rOSl^2013 and tp.give alt consequential benefits including the full back wages;-- , . ^
(c) To declare that the ground taken by the respondent authority in the impugned order dated 14,,1 March, 2015 is highly illegal and arbitrary in terms of the Government of India notification appearing at Annexure A-11 of this original applicant and in terms of the training certificate issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Defence as well as certificate issued by the Ordnance Factory Dum Dum to that effect, that your applicant passed the 96th All India Trade Test in the Trade of 'Machinist' which is appearing at Annexure A-2 of this original application and to declare that your applicant is found eligible in connection to the post of Examiner (Skilled) in terms of the notification dated 01.11.2011 and in terms of the selection process, the applicant got the appointment is otherwise valid and in accordance with law and the order of cancellation of the respondent authority is highly illegal and arbitrary;
(d) To pass an appropriate order directing upon the respondent authority to restore the selection of the applicant for the post of Examiner (Skilled) in terms of the notification . dated 1.11.2011 by setting aside and/or quashing the impugned order dated 14th March, 2015."
•v' > 3 oa. 350.00409.2019
2. Heard Ld. Counsel for the applicant. Affidavit of service is taken on record.
3. The applicant's submissions, as made through his Ld. Counsel, is that the applicant had applied in response to an Employment Notification dated 1.11.2011 for the post of Examiner (Skilled) and that the applicant duly appeared in the written test, practical test as well as interview for the same. That, on 14.2.2013, the applicant joined his duties to the post of Examiner (Skilled) and that he subsequently obtained his certificate of medical fitness after being examined by the designated authority.
Although the applicant has; been .wpr|king-in ,the said post as Examiner " r. ; 1 ' ' ' ' :
i'-
(Skilled) for more than two years, suddenly on 14th March^2015, the candidature ; T ' - ...... " V of the applicariKwas cancelled^alopg with Tiis appointment'order as issued on 14.2.2013. The said appointment .was cancelled-. bn the ground that the applicant's education .- qualification bft Prathama' Parik'sha from Hindi Sahitya j .
Sammelan, Allahabad -is..noWrecbgnized 'by^a_ny-State or Central^ Board of i* ..r-V '' Educationr ,that the applicant .did not possess'TTI or its equivalent ihjthe Fitter u._;- ■' 'i a'- 11 ji i'. .
Trade andUhat the applicant/had^hot submitted^the requisite information of his ..y V / ;■ 'i ' r ';/■■■:- , /■ experience in the certificate f6/j:jin the,ja!dveftiseraent..
That, the: applicant-preferred an appeal before^he Director .General Directorate Gerierahbf Quality Assurance (DGOA-)'Organisation- Government of ...
India, Ministry-of Defence with reminders thereto, but the fespphdent authority ,r did not respond to the same.
Hence, being aggrieveds at.Jhe fact Jhat rhieJ candidature was cancelled without giving him an opportunity of being heard and on irrational grounds, the applicant has approached the Tribunal.
Ld. Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant would be fairly satisfied if his pending representation dated 8.4.2015 and reminder thereto dated 13.5.2018 (Annexure A-12 to the O.A.) are directed to be considered in a time bound manner and, particularly, in the light of recognition accorded by ;
be *3 'r'"ir~y 4 oa. 350.00409.2019 rr Government of fndia to Prathama Pariksha from Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, .•f & S y' r Allahabad (Annexure A-11 to the O.A.).
4. Although the respondents are not represented, It would not be prejudicial to direct the concerned respondent authority to dispose of the applicant's representation-cum-appeal, which is pending with the respondent authorities, since 8.4.2015.
5. Accordingly, without entering into the merits of the matter, we hereby direct the respondent No. 2, who is the Director General, Directorate General of Quality B| .....
Assurance (DGOA) OrganisMo^Gpl^nment of^lndia^ Ministry-of Defence, to examine and to dec1c|.e'luploh the representation of'thb applicant-dated 8.4.2015 followed by reminder dated 1 his end' within ^period of 4 S /fp'l. ! | f -• weeks ffom^he.-.date of re'eeiptof^a.copylof^his^order^lwbile examinipg tfie same, 0^ !\\\; i / /y \ the respondent author/t! shal^referjb|th^/&t)gnifion bfJ©ovemment|bf India to % the |ratfiarna Pariks|ssfS!i^^|fcroelah.4ahabad fi104d in No. F. a^OOI-TS-fesflR^i^^l^ES^Sljjged by the.Lcb Counsel for the ^applicant, and?|therefftef, pass |a\eaVned^and speaking^ order in ■j L J ^ k \■ \ i 's>§-r , ' $ accordance with law. Jrhe decision arrived at should be^mmunicated forthwith to the ^plicant/ 7 k \ / \ VV^ / / .
6. ThetO.A.^is disposed of^with the above directions. Jbere shall be'no orders ■ \ .. , .
/ &
on costs. * X% " f. X. *>•
* ■ ? i ,/i!l
./*■
,'Ww
% -■v
f.
=-
i
L
(Dr. Nandita Chatterjee) (Bidisha danerjee)
Administrative Member Judicial Member
SP