Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

Despite empanelment of Ruma Chakraborty as a first candidate in the selection process for recruitment in the post of Junior Technical Assistant in terms of advertisement No.1 of 1990 relating to vacancy of seven posts from general category as no appointment letter was issued but subsequent advertisement of 1 of 1995 and 3 of 1996 were published for appointment of the candidates afresh, Smt. Ruma Chakraborty respondent No.1 moved the Tribunal in original application No.1043 of 1997 seeking the relief of giving appointment with retrospective effect by maintaining seniority over Partha Mukherjee and Debobrata Ray who were subsequently appointed in terms of subsequent selection process of the year 1995-96. One Sri Sanjay Kumar Saha who was third empanelled candidate of the list recommended by the selection committee in terms of advertisement No.1 of 1990 also moved the Tribunal seeking the same relief by an application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunal Act which was registered as original application No.367 of 1998. Both applications were taken up for analogous hearing and a common order delivered by the learned Tribunal below on 29th April, 2003 granting relief of appointment forthwith with seniority over and above the candidates appointed after advertisement No.1 of 1990. The order of tribunal dated 29th April, 2003 read such:

Learned Tribunal below relied upon that office memo, on considering the factual matrix of this case as proved from the respective affidavits and the office record as produced. Accordingly it is clear that the writ petitioners on breach of Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India appointed one Atraj singh in the post of JTA in a general category vacancy on 10th January 1994 with reference to vacancy in terms of advertisement No.1 of 1990 wherein respondent Ruma Chakraborty ranked first in the panel in order of merit, appointed Partha Sarathi Mukherjee by holding a new selection process held following the advertisement No.1 of 1995 and subsequently appointed other six candidates in general category vacancy in terms of advertisement No.3 of 1996. All those appointments accordingly right from the appointment of Atraj Singh were in breach of Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution as well as circular letter of 8th February, 1982.