Union of India & Ors. v. Central Administrative Tribunal & Ors.

Present:- Mr. Anil Rathee, Advocate for the petitioners. Ms Kiran Bala Jain, Advocate for the respondents.

1. 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? M.M.KUMAR, J.

1. The Union of India, Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited and their officers have preferred the instant petition under Article 226 of the Constitution with a prayer for setting aside orders dated 1.12.2008,

15.12.2008 and 23.3.2009 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh.

2. Brief facts of the case are that original applicant- respondent Nos. 2 to 9 initially joined the Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited as Daily Regular Mazdoor in Ambala Circle on different dates and in different years. It is undisputed that apart from Ambala Circle, there are other different Circles in the State of Haryana and for promotion from the post of Daily Regular Mazdoor to that of Telecom Technical Assistants (for brevity, ‘TTA’), no vacancy was available in Amabla Secondary Switching Area where the original Civil Writ Petition No. 9130 of 2009 2 applicant-respondents were working. For promotional quota, a competitive examination to the extent of 40% posts of TTA was to be held. The petitioners have claimed that since there was no vacancy available in Ambala Circle, original applicant-respondent Nos. 2 to 9 were not entitled to compete for the aforesaid competitive examination. However, they approached the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench Chandigarh (for brevity, the `Tribunal') on 1.12.2008 by filing Original Application No. 750/HR/2008 and claimed that despite their undertaking to the effect that they may be promoted to the Grade of TTA and posted in any other Circle, they have not been allowed to undergo training for 10 weeks although they had qualified the written test. Accordingly, a complaint lodged before the Tribunal was that they have been deprived of training, which is confined to the number of candidates equivalent to number of vacancies of the concerned SSA and other Circles. The original applicant-respondents succeeded in persuading the Tribunal to pass an interim order on 1.12.2008 to allow them to join the training of 10 weeks provisionally.

3. When the order was received by the petitioners, they filed a reply taking the stand that it was not possible to comply with the directions as the course had already commenced with effect from

1.12.2008 and that the original applicant respondents could be accommodated for the course commencing on 22.12.2008. The petitioners claimed before the Tribunal that the prayer of the original applicant-respondents was contrary to the rules known as Telecom Technical Assistant (TTA) Recruitment Rules 2001 because the cadre of TTA is SSA based and no recruitment could be made by Civil Writ Petition No. 9130 of 2009 3 promoting the employees of one SSA in respect of other SSAs . Accordingly, it was asserted that a candidate from Ambala SSA could not be accommodated in Karnal, Rohtak or other SSAs because they constitute a distinct and different cadre. The aforesaid stand of the petitioners was partially accepted by the Tribunal and in its order dated 15.12.2008, the Tribunal recorded an agreed order holding that the original applicant-respondents were to be accommodated for the course commencing on 22.12.2008. Operative part of the consented order dated 15.12.2008 passed by the Tribunal reads thus: “ In view of the aforesaid admissions respectively made by both the parties, nothing survives for further consideration in the matter involved in this O.A. Accordingly, the parties hereto have requested that the present O.A. be disposed of with the directions that the respondents will allow the applicants to undergo training which will hold good for their induction on promotion as TTA against vacancies available in their own respective SSA in due course of time and the applicants will not stake any claim for promotion to the vacancies arising in other SSA areas based on their training as above. The request is granted and it is directed accordingly. No order as to costs.”

4. Thereafter review petition filed by the petitioners has also been dismissed by the Tribunal vide order dated 23.3.2009 holding that the apprehension of the petitioners that other similar employees would start claiming the similar relief was misconceived because the Civil Writ Petition No. 9130 of 2009 4 Tribunal had not passed a general order, which might be applicable to all such persons. It was further held that the petitioners did not bring on record any information regarding any of the other candidates in other SSAs, who were to undergo training which might be similar to the case of the original applicant-respondents.

5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties at a considerable length and find that the instant petition is liable to be dismissed. Firstly, the original applicant-respondents were permitted to sit in the written test and now on the basis of passing of the written test, they were allowed to undergo training in pursuance of the directions issued by the Tribunal as noticed above. It may be true that although the persons belonging to the feeder cadre who were working as Daily Regular Mazdoor in SAS Ambala Circle may not be eligible for promotion to the post of TTA, which might have become available in other SSAs, yet the examination and the training which they have undergone can be utilized for SAS Ambala as and when a vacancy in the cadre of TTA falls vacant and secondly, order dated 15.12.2008 passed by the Tribunal is a consented order and does not call for interference. Therefore, we are of the view that no interference in the direction issued by the Tribunal would be necessary. For the reasons mentioned above, this petition fails and the same is dismissed.

17.11.2010 VK (M.M.KUMAR ) JUDGE ( RITU BAHRI ) JUDGE