Central Administrative Tribunal - Mumbai
Sandeep Chandrakant Sawant vs M/O Health And Family Welfare on 6 February, 2018
1 OA No.101/2018
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
MUMBAI BENCH, MUMBAI.
ORIGINAL APPLICATION No.101/2018.
Date of Decision: 06.02.2018.
CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI ARVIND J. ROHEE, MEMBER (J)
HON'BLE SHRI R. VIJAYKUMAR, MEMBER (A)
1. Mr. Sandeep C. Sawant
Working as Social Worker,
Human Reproduction Research
Centre No.406, J.J. Group of
Hospitals. R/at Flat No.101,
Plot No.65/66, Sector 4,
Guridham Co-op Hsg. Society,
New Panvel - 410 206.
2. Mrs. Halima Shakil Khan
Working as Social Worker,
Human Reproduction Research
Centre No.406, J.J. Group of
Hospitals. R/at Plot No.100,
Flat No.203, Qaswa Heights
Co-op Hsg. Society, Sector 50,
New Seawoods, Nerul,
Navi Mumbai 400 706. ... Applicants
(By Advocate Shri S.V. Marne)
Versus
1. Union of India,
Through the Secretary,
Ministry of Health & Family Welfare,
Nirman Bhavan, New Delhi 110 018.
2. The Director General,
Indian Council & Medical Research,
V. Ramaswamy Bhavan,
Ansari Nagar, P.B. No.4911,
New Delhi 110 029.
3. The Director
National Institute for Research In
Reproductive Health,
Jahangir Merwanji Street,
Parel, Mumbai 400 012.
2 OA No.101/2018
4. The Officer In-Charge & Principal
Investigator,
Human Reproduction Research Centre
of ICMR No.406, OBST, Gynaec
Department, Sir J.J. Group of
Hospitals, Mumbai 400 008. ... Respondents
ORDER (Oral)
Per : Shri A.J. Rohee, Member (J)
Today when the matter is called out for admission, heard Shri Vishal Shirke, learned proxy counsel holding for Shri S.V. Marne, learned Advocate for the Applicant. We have carefully perused the case record.
2. The Applicants have approached this Tribunal under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 seeking the following reliefs:
"8.a) This Hon'ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to call for the records of the case from the respondents and after examining the same direct the respondents to regularize the services of the applicant nos.1 & 2 on the post of Social Worker w.e.f. 11.05.1992 and 01.01.1994 respectively with all consequential benefits.
8.b) On being treated as regularly appointed Social Worker with effect from 11.05.1992 and 01.01.1994, the respondents be further directed to extend to the applicants all the consequential benefits and entitlements including pension and pensionary benefits.3 OA No.101/2018
8.c) Costs of the application be provided for.
8.d) Any other and further order as this Hon'ble Tribunal deems fit in the nature and circumstances of the case be passed."
3. The Applicants are presently working as Social Workers in the office of Respondent No.4 on contract basis since the year 1992 & 1994 respectively. It is stated that their contract was subsequently extended from year to year and they are still working. They claim regularization for rendering long term service with the respondents and it is stated that at other units, the services of similarly placed employees have been regularized.
4. The record shows that the applicants have submitted joint representation dated 16.09.2017 (Annexure A-25) to the Respondent No.2 for regularization of their services. However, it is stated that nothing has been heard from the other end so far. The present OA has been filed on 21.11.2017.
5. Considering the fact that there is no adverse order rejecting the applicants claim for regularization, we are of the view that 4 OA No.101/2018 ends of justice will be better served, if appropriate directions are issued in the matter.
6. The Respondent No.2 is, therefore, directed to consider and pass a reasoned and speaking order on the pending common representation dated 16.09.2017 (Annexure A-
25) of the applicants within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
7. The order so passed shall then be communicated to the applicants at the earliest, who will be at liberty to approach the appropriate forum, in case their grievance still persists.
8. Since the applicants have relied upon number of decisions passed by various forums in the matter in support of their claim, we direct the Registry to forward one set of OA to the Respondent No.2 along with certified copy of this order, who shall consider it while passing the order on the representation.
9. The OA stands disposed of with the aforesaid directions at the admission stage, without issuing notice to the respondents 5 OA No.101/2018 and without making any comments on merits of the claim.
10. Registry to take expeditious steps in forwarding copy of this order to both the parties as directed above.
(R. Vijaykumar) (A.J. Rohee) Member (A) Member (J) dm.