-1- Civil Writ Petition No.16777-CAT of 2001. IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ... Date of Decision: January 23, 2008. Jarnail Singh ... Petitioner VERSUS Union of India through Secretary, Ministry of Defence, New Delhi and others ... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHINDER PAL. 1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ? Present: Mr.H.S.Saini, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Gurpreet Singh, Advocate, for respondents Nos. 1 to 4. -.- MOHINDER PAL, J. In this petition filed under Articles 226 / 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for issuance of a -2- Civil Writ Petition No.16777-CAT of 2001. writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the order dated December 06, 2000 (Annexure P-2) passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as `the Tribunal') whereby Original Application No.650- PB/2004 filed by the petitioner under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as `the Act'), was dismissed. The petitioner was selected as Casual Labourer on the basis of interview held on March 10, 1990. After his selection, police verification had also been done. The petitioner was intimated by the respondent-Department that appointment letter would be issued to him after the receipt of sanction from the concerned quarters. The petitioner belongs to a Scheduled Caste category. The case of the petitioner is that in the Special Recruitment Drive which had taken place for appointment to the posts of Casual Labourers from amongst the Scheduled Castes categories after his selection, certain other persons had been appointed but case of the petitioner was not considered. In the written statement filed on behalf of respondents Nos. 1 to 4, it has been stated that the only reason for non- issuance of appointment letter in favour of the petitioner was that sanction was not accorded by the Army Headquarters. Further that the petitioner did not appear for interview in the Special Recruitment Drive for selecting candidates belonging to Scheduled Caste Categories and, therefore, his name was not -3- Civil Writ Petition No.16777-CAT of 2001. considered. It has been further averred that as no appointment letter had been issued to the petitioner, he had no right to be appointed on the said post merely on the ground that he had been selected. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the records. Admittedly, the petitioner was selected for the post of Casual Labourer. He had also been medically examined and found fit for employment as is evident from Medical Fitness Certificate (Annexure A-1 to Annexure P-1). Further, Annexure A-2 to Annexure P-1 dated November 05, 1990 shows that the case for employment of the petitioner as Labourer had been forwarded to Army Headquarters to obtain sanction and it was mentioned therein that appointment letter would be issued on the receipt of sanction. Vide Annexure A-5 to Annexure P-1 dated December 11, 1997, it was intimated by the respondent- department to the petitioner that his case along with four others was taken up with the higher authorities for appointment as Labourer, but the same had been rejected. The question of sanction did not arise in this case because the petitioner had been selected through Employment Exchange and requisitions to the Employment Exchanges are always sent by the Department only after the release of sanction for the posts and not in anticipation of the sanction. During the course of arguments, original record was -4- Civil Writ Petition No.16777-CAT of 2001. produced by the learned counsel for respondents Nos. 1 to 4. In the record, at page 208 there is a letter bearing No.No.80992/SCT/OS-8C (i) dated August 30, 1996 issued by the Directorate General of Ordnance Services, Master General of Ordnance Branch, Army Headquarters, DHQ PO New Delhi – 1100 11 to the Commandant 17 Field Ammunition Depot C/o 56 A.P.O wherein it has been mentioned as under:- “ ADJUSTMENT OF SURPLUSES AND DEFICIENCIES. 1. xx xx xx 2. No surplus staff is at present available to fill up the following vacancies:- (a) Direct Recruitment: MAZDOOR - NIL (b) Select Panel Special Recruitment Drive (SC/ST) 1989 & 1990. MAZDOOR - 28 (Twenty Eight) ( c ) Existing Select Panel consequent to Ban Imposed on Direct Recruitment. MAZDOOR - NIL.” -5- Civil Writ Petition No.16777-CAT of 2001. Further, at page 259 in the said record , there is a letter bearing No.90992/SCT/Lab/OS-8C (i) dated December 03, 1997, issued by the Directorate General of Ordnance Services, Master General of Ordnance Branch, Army Headquarters, DHQ PO New Delhi – 1100 11 to the MG ADC, HQ Western Command, Chandigarh, mentioning as under:- “ Adjustment of Surplus and Deficiencies: Labourer. 1. Reference your Sig No. O 7195 dated 29 Nov 97. 2. The vacancies released against Special Recruitment Drive (SC/ST) cannot be filled up by Direct Recruitment. Please surrender the same” A perusal of the afore-quoted correspondence reveals that at the time when letter bearing No.No.80992/SCT/OS-8C (i) August 30, 1996 was issued by the Army Headquarters, it was mentioned that no surplus staff was available at that time to fill up the vacancies of `Mazdoor' by way of direct recruitment whereas twenty eight `Mazdoors' were available for recruitment out of the candidates who had been selected in the Special Recruitment Drive from amongst the Scheduled Castes/ Scheduled Tribes candidates. This letter further mentions that no panel -6- Civil Writ Petition No.16777-CAT of 2001. consequent to ban imposed on direct recruitment of Mazdoor was existing. This letter does not depict correct picture as the petitioner was available for appointment and he had been selected prior to the ban imposed on Direct Recruitment and prior to the Special Recruitment Drive. Further, a perusal of the letter No.90992/SCT/Lab/OS-8C (i) dated December 03, 1997 reveals that the Army Headquarters had ordered surrender of the vacancies which had been released against Special Recruitment Drive on the ground that the posts meant for Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes candidates could not be filled up by direct recruitment. Admittedly, the petitioner belongs to a Scheduled Caste Category and, as stated above, had been selected prior to the ban imposed on Direct Recruitment and prior to the Special Recruitment Drive. The Tribunal, while passing the impugned order, did not take into consideration the above facts and dismissed the Original Application filed by the petitioner merely by holding that no appointment letter had been issued in favour of the petitioner and that his candidature had already been rejected by the respondent-Department. In view of the facts explained above, the said finding of the Tribunal cannot be allowed to prevail. Consequently, this writ petition is allowed and the impugned order dated December 06, 2000 (Annexure P-2) passed by the Tribunal is set aside. The respondent-Department is directed to appoint the petitioner on the post of Labourer with -7- Civil Writ Petition No.16777-CAT of 2001. immediate effect. It is made clear that at the time when medical examination of the petitioner was done vide Annexure A- 1 to Annexure P-1, he was twenty seven years of age and now his age will not be considered as a bar for his appointment. The petitioner will be given seniority and other benefits as Labourer from the date the persons after his selection as such were appointed. However, he will not be entitled to arrears of pay and allowances. There shall be no order as to costs. The Registry is directed to return the original record to Mr.Gurpreet Singh, Advocate, appearing for respondents Nos. 1 to 4. ( HEMANT GUPTA ) ( MOHINDER PAL ) JUDGE JUDGE January 23, 2008. ak