An application before the Administrative Tribunal is premature if the applicant has not exhausted available departmental remedies, such as a pending representation, as mandated by Section 20 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985.

O R D E R (ORAL)

As per: Sanjeeva Kumar, Member (Administrative)

The matter is on Board under the caption “For Admission (Subject To Office Objection)”.

2. The Registry has raised certain objections in the matter that there seems delay in OA and representation filed on 11.09.2023.

3. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the subject matter relates to counting service and grant of proper pay and same is recurring cause. In identical cases, no such defect pointed out.

4. In view of the peculiar facts and circumstance of the case, we deem it appropriate to overrule the objections raised by the Registry and the Registry is directed to give proper OA No in the present matter and issue related to limitation being mix question of fact and law shall remain open.

5. Applicant is working in the post of Assistant Sub Inspector in National Investigation Agency (in short NIA) and has invoked the jurisdiction of this Tribunal under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, seeking main relief(s) [As extracted from the OA] reads as:

“a) Direct the Respondents to count the Applicant’s past service rendered in BSF in the Pay Band of Rs. 5200-20200/- with Grade Pay of Rs. 2400/- w.e.f. 20.12.2012 till the date of his absorption in NIA (i.e. 13.10.2014) for the purpose of promotion to the post of Assistant Sub Inspector in the NIA and for further promotion to the post of Sub Inspector w.e.f. 20.12.2023 as the Applicant has completed Six-year regular service in the Pay Band-1 (Rs. 5200-20200/-) with Grade Pay of Rs. 2800/- w.e.f. 20.12.2017; and

b) Direct the Respondents to convene a review DPC and consider the Applicant’s case for promotion to the post of Assistant Sub Inspector in the NIA for the Vacancy Year 2018 and promote him if found fit along with all consequential benefits, and further consider the Applicant’s case for promotion to the post of Sub Inspector in the NIA for the Vacancy Year 2024 by holding Review DPC and promote him if found fit, along with all consequential benefits; and

c) Pass such further or other order, as this Hon’ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.”

6. Learned Counsel for the applicant submits that applicant joined BSF as Constable on 13.12.1990 and was inducted in NIA on deputation basis on 11.02.2010. During deputation, applicant was promoted to the post of Head Constable in BSF w.e.f. 20.12.2012 in Pay Band Rs. 5200-20200/- with Grade Pay Rs. 2400/-. Thereafter applicant was permanently absorbed as Head Constable in NIA on 13.10.2014 on analogous post and same pay scale. It is further contended that applicant’s service rendered in BSF on analogous post is liable to be counted for the purpose of eligibility for promotion in NIA in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in K. Madhavan vs Union of India , (1987) 4 SCC 566 and judgment passed by Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in Jasveer Singh vs Union of India in WP(C) No. 6686/2021.

7. Learned Counsel for the respondents appears on advance service and submits that applicant is seeking reckoning of service rendered as Constable in BSF, later on absorbed in NIA as Head Constable vide order dated 13.10.2014. Applicant has submitted representation dated 11.09.2023 before the respondents seeking review DPC and consequential benefits and same is still pending.

8. Learned Counsel for the applica