Promotion eligibility and reserved quotas for disabled individuals under administrative guidelines must be implemented in compliance with statutory provisions.

Hon’ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J)

The present OA has been filed by the applicant under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act , 1985, seeking the following reliefs :

(i) That the Hon'ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to pass an order quashing the impugned order dated 15.07.2021 (Annex.AII) only to the extent by which the respondents have not considered the applicant for his promotion to the post of skilled (Elect.) against 3% posts of reservation to the handicapped person and consequently pass an order directing respondent to considered and promote the applicant to the post of skilled(electrician) against 3% handicapped quota w.e.f 15.07.2021 with all consequence benefits along with the arrears of pay and allowances.

(ii) That the Hon'ble Tribunal may further graciously be pleased to pass an order and direct the respondent to apply the 3% reservation in promotion of handicapped person with all consequential benefits after preparing roaster w.e.f. 18.02.1997. (iii) Any other relief which the Hon'ble Tribunal deem fit and proper may also be granted to the applicant along with costs of litigation.

2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was initially appointed to the post of Mate (Semi- Skilled) Electrician on 13.01.2016. The next higher promotion from Mate (Semi-Skilled) is that of Mate (Skilled) for which the applicant became eligible to be considered on completion of 3 years of service i.e. 13.01.2019.

Furthermore the applicant had also participated in the Skill Test which is the qualifying test and had cleared the same in the year 2020. Thus, the counsel submits that upon the applicant qualifying the Skill Test in the year 2020 and since he has already completed three years of service in the feeder cadre, he is fully eligible to be considered for promotion as Mate (Skilled).

3. Learned counsel submits that the applicant is a disabled candidate and in terms of the OM dated 09.10.2024 and earlier OMs dated 20.11.1989 and 18.02.1997, the respondents ought to have considered him for promotion by providing 3% reservation to the Physically Handicapped persons. He submits that the post of Mate (Skilled) is a post to be filled up 100% by promotion. As such, the respondents are required to maintain a register showing the seats reserved for physically handicapped candidates. The respondents had conducted year wise DPC and on 15.07.2021, the respondents had issued the promotion orders. The year wise DPC was conducted from the year 2014-2021 in one go.

4. Learned counsel submits that the applicant ought to have been considered against the year 2021. As such, the respondents have violated the DoP&T instructions by not providing reservation to the physically handicapped persons.

5. On issuance of notice, the respondents have filed their counter affidavit.

6. In the counter affidavit, the respondents are opposing grant of relief to the applicant and have stated as under :

Preliminary Objection:-

i. That the applicant is challenging the order dated 15.07.2021 whereby 87 persons have been promoted to the post of Skilled [Electrician] on the ground that the applicant is entitled for the reservation against 3% handicapped quota, but none of the persons already promoted have been impleaded as party in the OA. Hence the OA is bad for non-joinder -of necessary party and hence laible to be dismissed on this ground alone.

Parawise Reply:-

1. That the contents of the para of the OA are wrong and hence denied. The applicant was appointed in MES through Direct Recruitment under reservation of 3% quota for physically handicapped PH (gen) category. in MES, Mate (SSK) Direct - Recruitment is done as per SRO 48 wherein 80% candidates are recruited through direct recruitment (Ann. R-I). Furthermore, as per para (ii) of GoI, DoP&T letter No 36035/7 /95-Es