ORDER

Per: Hina P. Shah, Judicial Member The present Original Application has been filed by the applicant under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 for the following reliefs:-

“(i) By an appropriate order or direction the respondents may be directed to let the applicant continue on her current posting looking to the penurious condition of her family.

(ii) Cost of the application may also kindly be awarded to the poor applicant; and Any other order or direction which this Hon’ble Tribunal deems fit and proper may also kindly be passed in favour of the applicant in the larger interest of the equity justice and law.”

2. The brief facts of the case, as stated by the applicant, is that the post of GDS BPM, Theekariya Meena B.O. a/w Kotkhawada S.O. under Sambhar Lake H.O. was lying vacant and, hence, as a temporary arrangement, applicant was provisionally appointed as GDS BPM in the year 2015. She was working with utmost satisfaction and her service career is unblemished. Respondents invited applications from eligible candidates for the post of GDS BPM at various places which also included the location at which the applicant was working and, thus, 3 applicant also applied for the same. But to her surprise, she was shocked to know that provisional selection of one Babli Prajapat D/o Kishan Lal Prajapat for the post of GDS BPM, Theekariya Meena B.O. a/w Kotkhawada S.O. under Sambhar Lake H.O. has taken place though the applicant has enough experience of working on the said post since 2015. As Babli Prajapat was required to remain present on 12.02.2020 for verification and genuineness of certificates, however, she could not present herself as required. As applicant is sole breadwinner of her family which consists of her ailing mother who is suffering from paralysis and her father who is severe heart patient and has a younger brother who is dependent on the applicant. Though applicant was working satisfactorily on the post of GDS BPM and the post is lying vacant, and as she is in need of job, yet respondents did not consider her case. Thus, applicant has approached this Tribunal seeking a direction to respondents to let the applicant continue working on her current posting as GDS in larger interest.

3 (a). After issue of notices, respondents filed their reply stating that the applicant was initially engaged 4 as a substitute/outsider worker purely on temporary basis against the post of GDS BPM, Thikariya Meena Branch Post Office under Kotkhawada Sub Post Office, by Inspector of Post, Lalsot Sub Division on 11.09.215. Applicant was engaged as a substitute against one Shri Balchand Meena, GDSBPM, who was removed from engagement vide departmental proceedings. Applicant has worked in different spells as substitute / outsider from 11.09.2015 to 07.04.2020 on the post of GDS BPM at Thikariya Meena B.O. purely on stop gap arrangement / temporary basis and neither any assurance nor any provisional order was given to her during her engagement as GDS BPM Thakhariha Meena. She was not engaged as per Recruitment Rules under Article 309 of the Constitution of India and no formal appointment/engagement order was issued to the applicant. The applicant does not come under the purview of the Casual Labourers (Grant of Temporary Status & Regularization) Scheme as per the instructions contained in the Postal Directorate letter dated 12.04.1991 and there is no provision to regularize the engagement of the substitutes or to provide an engagement in the department as a GDS 5 on regular basis on the basis of his/her services rendered as substitute in the Department. Moreover, as per para (6) under Rule 7 of GDS (Conduct & Engagement) Rules, 2011, the substitute may be discharged from engagement by the appointing authority at any time without assigning any reason or without