r-HC—78 ^" 7°^ •'^i^Kn^^eitilwKo, [®i<'iiyli< *II*ICTI n»*iicn ^vf^ Tra^ (yil^^) 3TI^T ^T R-lJob 'TOT ^V^ $ir»*iicr» J ^TTW^rf^T 3?TT^T PETITJONER: RES^PONDENTS: -\ 1 6 (Writ Petitlon underArticles^ ct»i<ifa<i1»i*ii*i<?if'^ FsA<l <Pn^.i< ^ 3tRFl 37T^5T Raghunath Singh, son of Shri Guharam Kurml, aged about 35 years, Branch Post Master, Post Office - tlrga, resident of viiiage tlrga, district - Ourg (Chhattisgarh) srsus- Ths Union of India, through: its - Secretary, Department of Post and Telegraph, New Delhl. The Director, Postai Servlces, Government of India, New Delhi. ; The Sr. Superlntendent of Offlce, District Durg (Chhattisgarh) : The Head Post Master,'"'Post Offlce, Dlstrict Durg (Chhattisgarh) The Chief Post Master Qeneral, Chhattisgarh (Parimandai) Ralpur (Chhattisgarh) Centra! Admlnistrative Tribuna!, • Sench at Jabalpur, through: its Secretary, Bench at BIJaspur (Offtee 'of .the CoJJector,. Dlstrict Bilapsur) • . . ., 26/227 ofthe Constitution of iFid.ia) I- .y'^. '^. ;r^""-~- \ ^^•:>-- ^'7 XI-HG—78 ^^A/ ^T '*1IAII<>1<4, ©tilw ,f«l<11-H^< «ii*iniCT»HIC(» W1200 3TT^T 'q^T ( yif^^) ^TT^r'SFT ^Jcb ^TT ^TI^T s»»*licb w Iji ^PTTW^f?^ 3TT^T -o Dlvislon Bench: Hon. Shri Dhirendra IWishra & Hon, Shri R.L.. Jhanv^r. JJ. 2^-2069:- Shri Vinay Pandey, counsei Shrl S.K. Beriwaj, Standing By the instant petltlon, the Annexure-P/5 dated 12th iVlarch whereby the appointment of t' Departmentai Branch Post iViai canoelled on the ground that jt. w of Annexure-P/7 dated 26th S Appiicatjon No.217/2001 whereb^ Jabalpur has. rejected .the ' canceSSation of appQlntment of the| Briefly stated facts of.th^ advertlsement (Annexure-P/1) is^ appiled for.provisional appointm^ the petitioner, 26 other candidat^ The petltioner was appolnted {Annexure-P/2). His apppintme| •orcerdated 12-5-2000 (Annexure] show c^use nottoe dated;31-T^ <=M^<rt<fl^ iTTR^Jt ^ fel<l <P»i^i< ifrstRm^ii^r jfor the petitloner. pounsel for respondents No.1 to 5. '. Ipetitioner has Impugned'the order of 2001 passsd by rsspondent No.3 ;|ie pstitioner on. the or' Extra ^ter (for short •EDBPM') has been tis irregular and aiso agalnst. the order ^ptembsr, 2003 passed.in Orlgina! the Centra! Adrninistrative Tribynai at pe|tit!on and conflrmed the order'Qf. Ipetltioner. i^ case are that In response to the |ued by respondent No.3 the petjtioner |it on the post of EOBPM. Apart.'from |s aiso applied for the aforesaid post. pr^vlsionaljy .vide order 1-5-2000 |it was. subsequentiy regularized vlde ^P/3). The petltloner was served wjth a - -^pOOl by respondent'^No.3 mentlonjng I- i-'^msf [-HG—78 ^^ T<ii*ii<n<i, ®Kl'M4i<o,f«i<ni'yy *<i*i<»n <»»iici» :^^00 ^TT^T '^^K (yif^^T) 3TT^T ^T ^Jcb Wff 3TT^T *^i<=b ^^TTW ^lf^T 37T^T ,_^7 -J therein that his appointment was ir| petitioner repjled the sa.id show/j the.reafter his .appointment was c^ 12-3-2001. The petltloner befoi'e the Centra! Admlnlstrative T| rejected vids order ofAnnexure-P/^ Learned counsei for the peti| appolnted on the post of EDBP| selection process, however, hjs apjj afford'ng h§m'any opportunlty of'h^ the petitioner does not ment'on as| Irregular.. Even in the 'mpugr^ appojntment Is canceiied, as the reason assigned In the order as 'l irreguiar. Referring to the advertlseme^ from educatlona! ;qua!ificatio^ thsre were other requlrements, w| fu!f'",' The petitloner was'selecte^ •futfl!ied requisite eligjbsllty criterla pij Gn' the other hend, .ieamed that fi'om bare perusai'of order 'of ^ Bppolntment of th8 petltioner was °M<<i<n<iM *ii*i<ni *i i's<<i <i^i^$i< ^3tRm37T^T teguiar and It.ls to be cancelled. The cause notlce vide Annsxure-P/S, Incelied vlde order of A.nnexure-P/6 c|iaS{enged the order of Annexure-P/6 1rjbunal,lhowever, hss appiication was 1 dated 25th September, 2003. lloner submits that the petitjoner. was [A sfter; he .partjclpated in the due lointment has been cancelied without taring.. 'Show cayse notlce issued to |to how appolntment of' ttie petJtJoner led Qraer, it sjmply mentlons that his |ame was irregular and t,here is no t|o how appolntment of the petjtioner. lit of Annexure-P.'t, It was argued that 1 as mentioned in the advertisemem, filch the candidate was •'equired to a4, as he wes found suitable and he' fescribed In.the advertisement. ^ounsel for- the respondents submjts ' lnnexure-P/3, it would. bs evldent that^ 3n coritractand theaame was + .^^-^.»..»53^^,^4^^^»..^^^^^S^^.s^^^i^^^^ <5^|fc-78 ^^^^,^^-~ . ;. , ^T^ '^lNl^PT, s?tH<?f+l<o, ;N^iNT^ ^ *ii*iCTi a»Hi<!h ^200 ^n^r TraEF (yf^^) ^TI^T'epT ^Jch TW ^TT^T sti*ilcb '^RHW ^f?H 3TT^?T ^- for terminatlon by notifylng In wril one •Shaliendra Slngh Deshmukh petltloner, as he has secured m complaint was forwarded for yeri found thst the comp!a;nant had ob and only theregfter. the appoii opportunity of hearing to the petltlo We have heard learned coui pleadings of the parties and the partles as also the order passed b} On the last 'date-of hearin produce entlre records regarding were produced for our perusal. From bare perusai ofthe'sh mentions thst the appointment o1 assigning any reason as .to' how' ordsr' by whlch his sppointment mentlon any;reason as to how his aocuments produced by the respo ail 27 candidstes'appSied for appc •Anne>ajre"P/1, the cand'date ai pern~a"ent.residant ofthe viSEage;! .establishing Branch Post. Office 'fi °hi<4?<yi<fll *ii*«rif^ffe^ <f^i^l< '^3ffiFT3TT^T Ing. 'A compialnt was received from that he was more ej'gible than the 3re marks than the pet'tioner.. The flcatjon snd after verincatlon, it was. :alnedmore marks than the petltioner- itment 'was canceiled after glvjng ner. ise! for the parties. We have perused,. documents flled.by the respective' r the Central Administrative TribunaS. ], the •. respondents v'/ere directed to Blection of the petitioror.'. The records; )w cause notlce, we find that It simpiy' the petitioner was irreguiar, wlthout his appointment was Irregular. The has been canceiied also does ,not appointment was Srregular. From' the fidents for our perusa!, we flnd that In intment. As per the advertlsement'?3f. ipiying for' appolntment s'hould .be he shouid have house 'of ws own for \. .he sha!! be requlre<j to arrange'for 14- (^ [-HG—78 '^T T*ii^i<n<i, 8>iil^<i<o, [aKniyy *11HCfll-«»H|Ct» "^200 ^n^r TT^^ (yif^^) ^TI^T ^T f<^icb WTT 3^?T 9T)*li<»» [ — ^mm ^^TTW ^Tf^T 37T^?T 5- houss appointment; he shc Board; he shouid not be Panch < character; he shouid have jndepe' Income for his liveilhood. .Aftei rece'ved for appointment to the se'ection and as perthe note app^ the petitioner and anc?ther .cand Kumar Deshmukh. no other cand the vEJSage. Slnce 'the petitioner h; Ramesh Kumar In.-the matricuia se-lected and appointed as EDBP^. From the eHgibliity crlteria g that matrlcuiatjon was not the sc w6re otE"ier criteria aiso. After c produced by the respondents, we of the petltloner was In' accordan the advertisement, ; Hls appoi?| affording hlm'any opportunlty of Teasons . as to how 'hls: appoirl Admjnlstrative Tribunai without c] summariiy rejected th:epetltionof| sustained.. ' • • ' appoirltment cni<<(<n<i1n *iM<nt "^ fs<<) <Fai^i< i73tRm3^T luld be matriculate i.e. 10+2 or 11" |r Sarpanch; he shoutd be of a good Nent and sufficient source'of hjs own scrutiny of aii the 27 appjlcations. ab|ove post, a table was prepared during |nded to the tabie so prepared, except Jdate $t S. No.22 name!y, Ramesh |date:;had any.lmmovable property 'n fcd obtained more marks than the'satd. tlon exam'inatjon,-..the p.etltjoner was I.: ''1- jven in th^ advertJsement,.'t-is evdent |ie criteria for appointment and"th.ere. ferefui examlnation of the documents ^re ofthe opinlon that the appointment fce with the conditlons snumerated 'n Itment has been • canceiled without |earing and without apprlslng hlm the. was irreguiar. The CentraJ l^nsldering the aforesald'aspects has ^he petltioner and thesame cannot.be. k- ii k^-- [-HG—78 *11*1CTI tt»*1|C|» "^oET <<||q|<yt^, ^tHw IXo, [®l<yll^^l .J^f....II^8J.61..-^200 ^TI^T^^ (J^^^) 3^tl^T'5RT f<4i<=h 'cWT 3T1^T 9h^licb Barve ^wi^ ^f^d 3TT^T (.4 jn the resu!t, the petition is ^ whereby his appointment h.as beerji No order as to costs. Sd/- Dhirendra Mishra Judge cbl^(<yt^1»1 ^l^dl ^' 'fe^ ^R^R ifr affim 3T^?T (owed and the order of Annexure-P/6 cance'led Is set aslde- Sd/- R.L. Jhanwar Judge K-