Back
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
PRINCIPAL BENCH
OA 2991/2018
Reserved on 14.12.2018
Pronounced on 19.12.2018
Hon’ble Mr. K.N.Shrivastava, Member (A)
Hon’ble Mr. S.N.Terdal, Member (J)
Sonu Kumar
S/o Sh. Bashisht Kumar,
Aged about 21 years
Fresh Appointment
R/o At- Mogalkuan Baulipar,
PO+ PS-Sohsarai,
Biharsharif, Nalanda,
BIHAR- 803118.
…. Applicant
(By Advocate: Mr. Ashutosh Thakur)
VERSUS
1. Union of India through its Secretary,
Department of Personnel & Training,
Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievance &
Pension, North Block, New Delhi-110 001
2. Staff Selection Commission,
Through its Chairman (Head Quarter),
Block No. 12, CGO Complex,
Lodhi Road, New Dewlhi.
3. Staff Selection Commission,
(Eastern Region),
Through its Regional Director.
Ist MSO Building (8th Floor),
Nizam Palace, 234/4,
A.J.C. Bose Road,
Kolkata-700 020.
... Respondents
(By Advocate: Mr. Hanu Bhaskar)
O R D E R
Hon’ble Mr. S.N.Terdal, Member (J):
Heard Shri Mr. Ashutosh Thakur, counsel for applicant and
Mr.Hanu Bhaskar, counsel for respondents, perused the pleadings and
all the documents produced by both the parties.
OA 2991/2018
2
2. In this OA, the applicant has prayed for the following reliefs:
“(a) Quash and set aside the impugned Circular No. F.No.3-
3/2017-P&P-II
dated
31.05.2018
and
Result
dated
14.06.2018 both issued by Staff Selection Commission
(Headquarter).
(b)
Direct the respondents to issue appointment letter to the
applicant on post code No. ‘F’ in OBC category.
(c)
Direct the respondents to prepare a fresh Merit List of
candidates qualified as per the advertisement (initial rule).
(d)
Accord all consequential benefits.
(e)
Award cost of the proceedings.”
3. The relevant facts of the case are that in response to the
advertisement of 2017 Post Code no. ‘F’ issued by the Staff Selection
Commission (SSC), the applicant applied for the post of Junior
Translator, Junior Hindi Translator. The examination was held on
15.06.2017. The applicant participated in the examination and he was
provisionally held eligible and called for document verification. He
participated in the document verification also. But, however, as he had
not studied Hindi & English as main subject in all the three years, he
was not appointed.
4. The contention of the applicant is that he has B.A (Hons). In so
far as B.A (Hons.) course is concerned, the optional subject will be
studied only for two years not for all the three years. As such, he has
not studied both English and Hindi as main subjects in all the three
years. Thus basically he has not got essential qualification required for
the said post as per the “Note” portion of the advertisement which
reads as follows:-
OA 2991/2018
3
“Candidates must ensure that they have studied English
and Hindi as main subject in all the three years of B.A.
pass course.”
The further contention of the applicant is that in the past, the
respondents have appointed several candidates who have completed
B.A (Hons) course and as per the Delhi University, B.A (Hons.) course
system, the main subject is taught in all three years and whereas the
elective is taught only for two years and as such, candidates who had
studied elective subject only for two years have been appointed
earlier. The applicant has also stated that when the issue of difficulty
faced by the candidates who have undergone B.A. (Hons) course was
raised, a Committee was constituted and the said Committee have in
their recommendation dated 22.05.2018 recommended that only
candidates who have studied English & Hindi as main subjects in all
the three years of B.A. (Hons) course or B.A course should be
considered. The contention of the counsel for the applicant is that as
the B.A (Hons) course does not have the system of teaching elective
subject for all the three years, the recommendation itself is faulty.
5. We have perused the essent
