Central Administrative Tribunal - Kolkata
Md Sadik Ali vs Rrc (E Railway) on 4 December, 2018
i
J 1 o.a. 350.01655.2018
S CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL i s- •ft4
KOLKATA BENCH, KOLKATA
No. O.A. 350/01655/2018 Date of order: 4.12.2018
Present Hon'ble Ms. Bidisha Banerjee, Judicial Member
Hon'ble Dr. Nandita Chatterjee, Administrative Member
Md. Sadik Ali,
Son of Md. Atiar Rahaman,
Aged about 32 years,
By Profession Unemployed,
Residing at Ishwarigacha,
P.O. & P.S. Baduria,
Dist. - North 24 Parganas,
Pin-743 401,
West Bengal.
Applicant
VERSUS-
1. Union of India,
Service through the General Manager,
Eastern Railway,
Fairlie Place,
Kolkata - 700 001.
2. The Chairman,
Railway Recruitment Cell,
Eastern Railway,
56, C.R. Avenue,
Kolkata-700 012.
3. Asstt. Personnel Officer (C&S), -v.-
Eastern Railway,
Sealdah,
Kolkata-700 014.
.. Respondents
For the Applicant Mr. P.C. Das, Counsel
Ms. T. Maity, Counsel
For the Respondents Mr. A.K. Guha, Counsel
ORDER (Oral)
Per Dr. Nandita Chatterjee, Administrative Member:
An Original Application has been filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 seeking the following relief:-
'Y f;
2 o.a. 350.01655.2018 i "(i) An order directing the respondents to offer due appointment to the applicant in the said Gr. D post against PWD quota on immediate basis.
(H) An order directing the respondents to consider the case of the applicant on immediate basis, since undergone through the entire process of recruitment and came out successful, as evident through RTI information, on immediate basis.
(Hi) An order directing the respondents to consider and dispose of the representation made by the applicant in the interest ofjustice.
(iv) An order directing the respondents to produce entire records of the case since lying within the jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Tribunal for conscionable justice.
(v) Any other order or further order/orders as to this Hon'ble Tribunal may seem fit and proper."
2. Heard both Ld. Counsel, perused materials on record.
3. The applicant's submissions, as articulated through his Ld. Counsel, are that the applicant is a physically impaired person with 50% hearing disability. He had applied for recruitment in Gr. 'D' post in'response to Employment Notice No. 0112 under the PWD quota and, having become successful in the written examination held on 27.10.2013', was called for document verification on 16.5.2015. He was directed to appear for medical examination on 26.8.2015 and that he appeared at Ali Yavar Jung National Institute for the Hearing ''w.
Handicapped., Kolkata on 11.9.2015. Thereafter, however, the applicant was further directed to appear before the Sr. DPO, Eastern Railway at Sealdah with all certificates and testimonials which he duly complied with.
The applicant came to learn through RTI that he has been declared fit in hearing handicapped category. As, however, the applicant has not been appointed despite his success in written and medical examination, being aggrieved, he has approached the Tribunal in this instant Original Application.
4. This matter is taken up at the admission stage itself on the submission of the Ld. Counsel for the applicant that the respondents may be directed to consider and dispose of his representation in the interest of justice.
1 7- 3 o.a. 350.01655.2018
i-/ /' >
tdj Counsel for the applicant submits that a representation dated. f* 14.7.2018 (Annexure A-6 to the O.A.) is pending with the respondent authorities , !/ t and the applicant will be fairly satisfied if a direction is issued to the competent respondent authority namely, the respondent No. 2, who is the Chairman, RRC, Eastern Railway to dispose of the same within a specified time frame and in the light of the information obtained through RTI (Annexure A-5 to the O.A.) that the applicant has been declared fit in the category of hearing handicapped.
5. Accordingly, without entering into the merits of the matter and, with the consent of the parties, we hereby direct the respondent No. 2 namely, the Chairman, Railway Recruitment Cell, Eastern Railway to consider the representation of the applicant, if received at his end, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order in accordance with law and in the light of the disclosure made through RTI that the applicant had been declared fit in the hearing handicapped category. The applicant may be informed of the decision of the Respondent authority immediately.
' If, however, such representation has not been received at the end of the respondent No. 2, the applicant will take steps to ensure that the same is received within a period of ten days from the date of receipt of this order. On receipt of such representation, the respondent No. 2 will dispose of the said . representation according to law and in terms of disclosure made through RTI on the fitness of the applicant in the category of hearing handicapped within a further period of four weeks from the date of receipt of such representation. The decision arrived at should be communicated forthwith to the applicant.
7. With these directions, the instant O.A. is disposed of. There will be no orders on costs.
I
(Dr: Nandita Chatterjee) (Bidisha Blnerjee)
Administrative Member Judicial Member
SP
C; \ 1 O.A. 1334.2017
li
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
KOLKATA BENCH, KOLKATA
No. O.A. 1334 of 2017 . Date of order: 4.12.2018
Present Hon'ble Ms. Bidisha Banerjee, Judicial Member
Hon'ble Dr. Nandita Chatterjee, Administrative Member Dr. Mriganka Baruah, S/o. Sri Bhupen Baruah, Aged about 38 years, Working as Assistant Professor at ESI-Post Graduate Institute of Medical Science & Research & Medical College, Joka (ESI-PGIMSR & Medical College Joka for short), at present residing at 1-102, Larica Tolly, Dhalipara Haridevpur, Mission More, M.G. Road, Kolkata - 700 104, West Bengal.
-V .. Applicant
w</i
% '
1. Union of#nd fa tH^iigl^Secreta ry^ ■ ^Ministry ^]Labj^^^fnifl|ymeni- v 5 1 Shram ShaRfrBhfliwan,^ Rafi Mafg^-^4^<- J / New Delhi-=110 001. 0-. / y
2. Direct6r,Gengral;J ^/ EmployeeVStaJeTn^iuran^e Corporation (ESIC), Headquarters Office (HO), Panchdeep Bhawan, CIG Marg, New Delhi - 110 002.
3. Secretary, Department of Personnel & Training (DOPT), Government of India, North Block, New Delhi-110 001.
4. Secretary, Medical Council of India (MCI) Pocket 14, Sector 8, Phase I, Dwarka, New Delhi-110 077.
5. Dean, ESIC-PGIMSR & MC Joka I i.
f 2 O.A. 1334.2017 i Diamond Harbour Road, ! Kolkata - 700 104.
6. Medical Superintendent (MS), ESIC Model Hospital Joka, * Diamond Harbour Road, Kolkata-700 104.
7. Deputy Director (MA), Employees State Insurance Corporation (ESIC), Headquarters Office (HO), Panchdeep Bhawan, CIG Marg, New Delhi-110 002.
.. Respondents
For the Applicant Mr. C. Sinha, Counsel
For the Respondents Ms. P. Saha, Counsel
- X •. : ^ Lf r-'y *
AikDEjL12a!f^\
■. ^ A
Per Dr. Nandita Chatteriee, AdiriirlistrMiv.eJ/fember:*^- 1 xs\ An Original Apfltoatio^undS| 'Section 19 of the
-v' Administrative Tribunals„$ct, 198'5;ipra4ing%feNhCTollowi%1 relief:-
ri ii 'V JtE' l
f
t ■ ^
\ i
r
"(a) To direct the- respondents lo..grant^promotion from the post of Assistant Professor im.^3fade,/Pay 6f600/- in PB-3 to Associate Professor in Grade Pay df -Rs^ fWO/^im PB-3 under Dynamic Assured Career Progression (DACP) Scheme w.e.f. 19.4,2015 with all consequential benefits.
(b) Any other order or orders as the Hon'ble Tribunal deems fit and proper. "
2. Heard Ld. Counsel for both sides, examined pleadings and documents on record.
3. The case of the applicant, in brief, is that the applicant was appointed as an Assistant Professor in MAPIMS Medical College, Tamilnadu on 28.7.2009 and that he had submitted an application for recruitment as teaching faculty (as Assistant Professor) in the discipline of Bio-Chemistry in response to recruitment notice dated 5.11.2012 issued by the respondent authorities for one post of \ i 3 O.A. 1334.2017 Assistant Professor as available at ESIC, PGIMSR and Medical College, Joka Kolkata. On being selected for the said post, the applicant was appointed as Assistant Professor on 19.4.2013.
That, when the applicant was recruited as Assistant Professor, the recruitment Rules of May, 2009 was in vogue and the amended recruitment rules came into force only with effect from 31.7.2015.
That, the Ministry of Health & Family Welfare, vide Office Memorandum dated 29.10.2008, had prescribed the condition for promotion under DACP Scheme wherein it had been specified that the Assistant Professor with Grade Pay of Rs. 6600/- with two years regular service (including service rendered in pre-revised scale) are entitled for promotion to the post of Associate Professor in Grade Pay of Rs. 7600/- and, ^as,'the^plicahf-has-been working as Assistant Professor in Grade Pay or£'Rs. 66p8/:):v^fe.vJ9.4.2pT3, he is entitled to the promotion to the -post *of As/bciafeiyBrqfess^^underfdACP Scheme w.e.f. 19.4.2015 as per the jpriferia 29.1®|2|08.
That, the Dean of-lsi-PGlIlli/& recorfflti Jnded the case of the / ■ ;
applicant along with others/for.appfopriate reli|T-and> although the applicant had vy / / represented repeatedly, honevof'thefrepresentation's of the applicant were \.
considered. Thus, being aggrievedT'therrapplicanT has approached the Tribunal in the instant O.A. claiming relief.
The Ld. Counsel for the applicant has highlighted the following factors in support of his claim:-
(a)That, the applicant had completed two years of regular service as on 18.4.2015;
(b)That, DACPs introduced by Government of India on 29.10.2008 was in force as on 5.11.2012 when the advertisement was published and also when the applicant had completed his period of two years of regular service.
/ 4 O.A. 1334.2017 r / t (c)That, the respondents had held out a categorical promise in the / \ / ! / recruitment notification part B(v) that the promotional avenues in the Department are available under DACP guidelines of Govt, of India r' and that the DACP Guidelines are very much applicable to the f respondent's organization as per Section 17{2) of ESIR guidelines which cannot be nullified by any subsequent Recruitment Regulation.
4. Per contra, the-respondents, have, in their written statements admitted that the respondents were in receipt of the various representations and the recommendation of the Dean of his Organization for favourable consideration but on account of pendency of different cases at the level of their headquarters, the applicant's representation coul^dtfte^h^e^NT^he respondents have also averred that the applicant'sfcaseJi^s^nS^Been r^ecjteb^and consequently the uas^pTjilbd fo££in the instant Original cause of action for seeking such r~ Application does not arise and the^ap^i'c^ti^s^liaDle to-be dismissed.
5.' -
We hence find tha't the applicant^ claifri has noHaeen sI controverted or ,* ) > v+r'' >' rejected by the respondents. The only issue is'that despite representations made \* / / by the applicant starting frojnN21.5;20T4 onwards"'an^ recommendation of the Dean, ESI-PGIMSR and ESIC^MediGal-^Gollege^the applicant is yet to be promoted and that no final decision has been communicated to him so far.
6. Accordingly, we are of the view that no useful purpose will be served in ..keeping this Original Application pending at our end. Hence, without entering into the merits of the matter, we hereby direct the competent respondent authority, who is the respondent No. 2, namely Director General, Employees State Insurance Corporation (ESIC), New Delhi to decide on the representations of the applicant and the recommendations of the Dean of ESIC-PGIMSR Medical College, in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
i I. ■r .
f
i
/ 5 O.A. 1334.2017
* 1
r
c
r While deciding on the same, the grounds on which the applicant is
! /
claiming his relief and which have been outlined in para 3 of this order are to be r examined and decided upon while disposing of the representations. Decision arrived at should be communicated forthwith to the applicant.
8. With these directions, the O.A. is disposed of. No costs.
X' (Dr. Nandita Chatterjee)
-y (Bidisha Banerjee) Administrative Member Judicial Member SP \