Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench, New Delhi This, the 11^th day of March, 2025 Hon’ble Dr. Chhabilendra Roul, Member (A)

Hon’ble Mr. Rajveer Singh Verma, Member (J)

PARVESH KUMAR SON OF SHRI SAMUNDER SINGH, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, GROUP- C, DESIGNATION-HEAD CONSTABLE (DRIVER), PIS NO. 28120138, BELT NO. 4178/SEC, PRESENTLY POSTED AT:

SECURITY UNIT, BAPUDHAM, NEW DELHI RESIDENT OF 622-A, PANA- LANGRA, VILLAGE- BARAHI, JHAJJAR, HARYANA-124505 ... APPLICANT (By Advocate : Shri Bajrang Vats)

VERSUS

1. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, DELHI POLICE POLICE HEADQUARTERS, JAI SINGH ROAD, NEW DELHl-110001

2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, SECURITY UNIT, DELHI POLICE, BAPUDHAM, CHANKAYAPURI, NEW DELHI.

... RESPONDENTS

(By Advocate : Ms. Nidhi for Ms. Kiran Ahlawat)

O R D E R (ORAL)

By Hon’ble Mr. Rajveer Singh Verma, Member (J) :-

The factual matrix of the case as enumerated by the learned counsel for the applicant is that pursuant to an Advertisement inviting applications for recruitment of temporary Constable (Driver) Male in the year 2009, the applicant being eligible, applied for the same. He was subjected to various stages of selection process i.e. Physical Endurance and Measurement Test (PET) and written test. He appeared under the UR Category.

3. Pursuant to the selection process, the final result was declared, wherein the applicant was not selected due to not scoring cutoff marks under the UR Category. However, the batch-mates of the applicant were allowed to join the training on 01.05.2010 (2010 batch). Digitally signed by RACHNA KAPOOR RACHNA KAPOOR

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted

that in the year 2011, the written test result for the

said post of Constable (Driver) Male was re-evaluated,

whereafter the applicant secured position in the merit

list on obtaining cutoff marks under the UR Category. The applicant qualified Trade Test and was declared medically fit. Pursuant to document verification, the applicant was finally issued appointment letter.

5. On 02.01.2012, the applicant joined the Delhi Police as Constable (Driver) and was directed to join the basic training course for the post of Constable (Driver) (2012 batch).

6. Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that on 12.01.2018, the respondents fixed the inter-se-seniority of the applicant along with his batch-mates, wherein the name of the applicant was correctly figured at Sl. No.203, however, his pay was not fixed notionally at par with his batch-mates, resulting in applicant getting lesser pay than his juniors/batch mates. He further submitted that Digitally signed by similarly situated persons approached the Tribunal in RACHNA KAPOOR

different OAs including the one preferred by Shri

Vikas S/o Shri Rohtash Ct. (Driver) in OA

No.3318/2018, seeking the similar relief. The said OA

was allowed on 15.04.2023 (Annexure-A/7) with the following directions :-

“9. The facts of the case are not disputed. The applicant was selected to the post of Constable (Driver), on his own merit, after going through the open competitive process, pursuant to the recruitment notice of the year 2009. The only reason he got actual appointment 3 years later during the year 2012 is that the verification of his documents could not take place within time. He agitated his grievances in an earlier round of litigation and he was successful in the same. Once he got appointed as Driver (Constable) there is no other assumption except to hold that this appointment should actually have taken place in the year 2009 or with respect to other candidates of the selection of the year 2009 and hence, the loss of three years cannot be a reason for the applicant to suffer a continuous loss during his service career.

10. Moreover, once the respondents have assigned him seniority along with his batchmates, it means that they have accepted the fact that the applicant deserves treatment at par with his batchmates.

11. We are not able to accept a position wherein essentially the benefits such as seniority are