O R D E R (ORAL)

Per: Justice S.Sujatha ...........Member(J)

The applicant has filed this application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 seeking the following reliefs:

“(i) To direct the respondents to consider the representation of the applicant dated 06.12.2021, Annexure A13 for promotion to the post of Head Clerk in accordance with law and extend consequential benefits accordingly and (ii) Grant such other relief deemed fit, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case.”

2. Briefly stated the facts as narrated by the applicant are that she joined the National Institute of Unani Medicine (NIUM), Bengaluru, an Autonomous Body under Ministry of Ayush, Government of India as Upper Division Clerk on 30.06.2005. She was offered the post of Assistant vide order dated 10.02.2015. The applicant submitted a representation to the Respondent No.2 on 30.06.2016 with a request to promote her to the vacant post of Head Clerk/Accountant. Thereafter, the respondents issued an advertisement bearing No.02/2019 in Employment News dated 23-29.03.2019 inviting applications from the eligible candidates for various posts including that of Head Clerk. In response to the same, the applicant submitted a representation to the Respondent No.2 on 15.04.2019 to consider her for the post of Head Clerk by direct recruitment relaxing the age limit. Thereafter, the applicant submitted a representation to the Respondent No.2 on 12.01.2021 stating that she has completed six years of service as prescribed under Recruitment Rules and she is eligible for promotion to the post of Head Clerk. The applicant approached this Tribunal in OA No.401/2021 seeking a direction to the respondents to consider her for promotion to the post of Head Clerk. However, the said OA was withdrawn in terms of the order dated 18.08.2021 to pursue the departmental remedies. Thereafter, the applicant submitted a representation to Respondent No.2 on 06.12.2021 with a request to promote her as Head Clerk. It is the grievance of the applicant that the said representation has not been responded to and no steps have been taken by the respondents to promote the applicant to the post of Head Clerk. Hence this OA.

3. Learned Counsel Shri A.R.Holla representing the applicant submits that in terms of Recruitment Rules provided to the post of Head Clerk, it is 100% by promotion, failing which by direct recruitment/deputation. The applicant has completed more than six years as Assistant and is eligible to be considered for the post of Head Clerk. The respondents are adopting delay tactics to fill up the post of Head Clerk without any justification. Hence seeks for interference of this Tribunal.

4. Learned Counsel Shri Vishnu Bhat representing the respondents submitted that as per the Recruitment Rules, the post of Assistant was to be filled up by promotion from amongst UDC/Store Keeper/Receptionist with five years regular service, the applicant was offered promotion to the post of Assistant being eligible candidate and she joined on 11.02.2015. As per the revised Recruitment Rules for the post of Head Clerk modified with the approval of the Ministry, the said post is to be filled 100% by promotion amongst Assistants with six years regular service failing which by direct recruitment/deputation. The post of Head Clerk fell vacant on 01.01.2016. On 12.11.2016, an advertisement was given inviting applications for various posts including Head Clerk as no eligible candidates were available for promotion. However, the post could not be filled up for administrative reasons. Again an advertisement was issued in the year 2019 inviting applications from the candidates for various posts including the post of Head Clerk. During the Covid-19 pandemic, the process could not be completed in time. However, process to fill up these posts including the post of Head Clerk is under process. The applicant is eligible to be considered for the post of Head Clerk from 01.01.2022 as per the rev