Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench, New Delhi O.A. No. 1541/2017 Reserved on:- 25.11.2025 Pronounced on:- 11.12.2025 Hon’ble Mr. Manish Garg, Member (J)

Hon’ble Mr. Rajinder Kashyap, Member (A)

Shri Vipin Kumar Tyagi age 43 years, Designation – LMV Driver/Fiter (ALM), Group C, S/o Sh. Brajesh Tyagi, R/o NDMC Quarter C-52, Palika Kunj, V.K. Dutta Colony, Karbala, New Delhi 110003 ...Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Surinder Kumar Bhasin)

Versus The NDMC, Through its Secretary, Palika Kendra, Sansad Marg, New Delhi -110001 …Respondent (By Advocate: Ms. Sriparna Chatterjee)

ORDER Hon’ble Mr. Manish Garg, Member (J)

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

“i. To regularize the service of applicant at the post of LMV Driver cum Fitter with effect from 26.06.2014 alongwith all the consequential benefits and perks of his employment in the wake of his satisfactory rendered services for 14 years now (Date of Joining:

28.03.2003) as LMV Driver cum Fitter ii. To direct the respondent to treat the applicant as LMV Driver cum Fitter employed on regular basis since the inception of his employment and pay him the salary according to the regular pay scale corresponding to LMV Driver cum Fitter as per his entitlement and consequential benefits in pursuance of certain guidelines formulated by the Hon'ble Apex Court and various High Courts in the catena of judgments.

iii. To pass any other order(s) as may deem fit and proper by this Hon'ble Tribunal so the merits of the case may meet the ends of justice."

2. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has challenged the office order dated 08.05.2015 to the extent that, as per the resolution dated 26.06.2014, wherein the services of 12 LMV Drivers working on a contract basis were regularized by making amendments in the Recruitment Rules of LMV Driver-cum-Fitter, two persons at serial numbers 11 and 12, namely Sh. R. Mukesh and Sh. Ved Pal, who had been appointed on a long-term contractual basis from

22.07.2004, were regularized in the headquarters and were granted ad-hoc benefits in terms of Office Order dated 23.07.2014.

2.1. Learned counsel stated that the applicant herein was appointed in the year 2003, yet he has been ignored for the grant of ad-hoc service benefits under Office Order dated 23.07.2014, which were granted to the aforesaid two persons who joined the service on

22.07.2004.

2.2. Learned counsel drew our attention to Clause 9 of the resolution dated 26.06.2014, which is relevant for the present purpose, and the same is reproduced herein below:

“9. COMMENTS OF THE LAW DEPARTMENT ON THE SUBJECT:

1. Law Department has gone through the Agenda Item and is of the view that the best way to fill in the posts and to accommodate the contractual drivers is to make slight amendments in the RRs. As against 50% by direct recruitment and 50% against the departmental recruitment, let the percentage change to the 25% from direct recruitment and 75% from the departmental candidates. This would mean about 20 Drivers from direct recruits against which 17 are working and the remaining 3 posts can be filled in through DSSSB. The remaining 59 posts can be filled in from departmental candidates. Against 59 posts so designated, 37 persons are working, and there will be 22 posts which can be filled in from departmental candidates. This will also include the 12 contractual drivers who could not be accommodated only because the recruitment has to be through DSSSB.

2. Amendment in the RRs is within the competence of the Council and as suck it is suggested that the RRs may be slightly amended by making a change that (i) 75% will be from departmental candidates including muster roll/contractual employees failing which by direct recruitment.

(ii) 25% by direct recruitment.

(iii) Trade test in both the cases.”

2.3. Learned counsel submitted that, by virtue of the said office order, the applicant has been su