Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 1307
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
MR. RAMESH SINGH THAKUR, J, MRS. ANJALI BHAWRA, A
Sudesh Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Forest Research Institute – Respondent
O.A./1262/2022
Mr. M. A. Safee, Ms. Shubh Mahajan along with Dr. Sandeep Sharma, Director
The Tribunal emphasized the necessity of maintaining a vacancy-based roster in recruitment to ensure fair representation of all categories as per the prescribed quotas.
Headnote:(A) Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 - Section 19 - Recruitment and Promotion Rules - Dispute regarding filling of posts of Lower Division Clerk (LDC) - Applicant challenged the advertisement for direct recruitment, asserting entitlement to promotion from Group C employees - Court emphasized the necessity of maintaining the prescribed quota for recruitment methods and the importance of a vacancy-based roster. (Paras 1-30)
(B) Service Jurisprudence - The principle of maintaining a vacancy-based roster is crucial for ensuring fair representation of all categories in recruitment - The Tribunal found that the respondents failed to adhere to the roster requirements, leading to an improper allocation of posts. (Paras 21-30)
Facts of the case:
The applicant, a senior Multi Tasking Staff, claimed entitlement to promotion to LDC based on the Recruitment and Promotion Rules, which allocate 85% of posts for direct recruitment, 10% for departmental examination, and 5% for promotion from Group C employees. The applicant argued that the respondents did not maintain the combined roster as required.
Findings of Court:
The Tribunal directed the respondents to consider the applicant for promotion at the appropriate roster point, emphasizing the need to follow the established recruitment rules.
Issues: The main issues included whether the respondents maintained the correct roster and whether the applicant was entitled to promotion under the 5% quota.
Ratio Decidendi: The Tribunal ruled that the respondents must adhere to the recruitment rules and maintain a vacancy-based roster, ensuring fair representation of all categories in filling the posts.
Result: O.A disposed of with directions to consider the applicant for promotion at the appropriate roster point.
ORDER
Per: RAMESH SINGH THAKUR, MEMBER (J):
1. This O.A has been filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act , 1985 against the advertisement dated 12.10.2022 to the extent whereby one post (General category) of LDC has also been sought to be filled up by way of Direct Recruitment. The applicant sought for the following reliefs:
“(i) That this Hon'ble Tribunal may kindly be pleased to issue a appropriate order, direction or order quashing the impugned advertisement dated 12.10.2022, (Annexure A-9) to the extent whereby one post (General category) of Lower Division Clerk has also been sought to be filled up by way of Direct Recruitment being patently illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, unconstitutional besides the same being in violation to the settled law of the land as the same is to be filled by way of promotion from amongst Group C Employees.
(ii) That this Hon'ble Tribunal may kindly be pleased to issue a appropriate order, direction or order to the respondents to maintain combined roster for filing up the post of Lower Division Clerk in the manner as provided in Para (xv) herein and above and such consider the Applicant for being considered for promotion to the post of Lower Division Clerk from amongst Group C Category of employees on the seniority-cum-fitness basis with all consequential benefits.”
2. The brief facts of the case as submitted by the applicant are that the Applicant after having acquired the essential educational qualification was initially appointed as Multi Tasking Staff-Security Attendant in Himachal Forest Research Institute on regular basis vide order dated 12.06.2014 (Annexure A-2) and joined his duties as MTS on 18.06.2014. He submits that the the next promotional post to the post of MTS is that of Lower Division Clerk which is to be filled up strictly on the basis of the Recruitment and Promotion Rules framed and implemented by the Respondents.
3. As per the Recruitment and Promotion Rules (Annexure A-3), there are 5 posts of Lower Division Clerk in Respondent No-3 Institute and is to be filled up in the following manner:-
A. 85% by Direct Recruitment
B. 10% Vacancies shall be filled on the basis of departmental qualifying examination amongst Group 'C' staff, who possess 12th Class pass certificate from recognized board and have rendered 3 years regular service in the pay band-1: Rs.5,200-20,200/- plus grade pay of Rs.1,800. The maximum age limit for eligibility for examination is 45 years. (50 years of age for the SC/ST)
C. 5% of the vacancies shall be filled on seniority cum fitness basis from Group 'C' employees who have three years regular service in posts with the grade pay of Rs.1,800/-
4. He submits that from the above provisions of the Recruitment and Promotion Rules it is very evident that 85% of the posts of the Lower Division Clerk are to be filled up by way of Direct Recruitment, 10% are to be filled up by way of Limited Departmental Examination and 5% from amongst Group C employees having three years of regular service in the post with the Grade Pay of Rs. 1800/- and the Applicant belongs to third category as he is working as MTS which is a Group C post in Himalayan Forest Research Institute and is eligible for promotion to the post of LDC against 5% Quota reserved for Group C Category Employees of the Institute. The 5 posts were sanctioned by the Respondent No.2 as approved by Ministry of Environment and Forest on 05.12.2013. Thus, in such a situation it was incumbent upon the Respondent institute to revise its roster as per the share allocated to the different feeder category in terms of New Recruitment and Promotional rules.
5. It is further submitted that the Applicant is the senior Most MTS with more than 8 years of service in the Grade Pay of Rs. 1800/- and as such is fully eligible for being considered for promotion to the post of Lower Division Clerk. From the above 5 posts which were sanctioned, 4 posts fall to the share of Direct Recruits and 1 post fall to the share of
