A. Sayed Koya and Another Union of India Rep, by Its Secretary to Govt. Ministry of Home Affairs, New Delhi and Others - Court Judgment |
| Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ernakulam |
| Nov-28-2011 |
| R.A.No. 64 of 2011 in O.A No. 462 of 2011 |
| THE HONOURABLE DR. K.B.S. RAJAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER & THE HONOURABLE MS. K. NOORJEHAN, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER |
| For the Review Applicants: Mrs. K.P. Geethamani, Advocate. For the Respondents: ------- |
hon'ble drk.b.s.rajan, judicial member 1. review application has been considered. the main ground for review is that certain points relating to percentage of qualifying marks fixed for promotion and that 12 persons including the respondents 8 and 10 have failed in their examination, have not been taken into account by the tribunal. 2. the main issue involved in the o.a is whether the applicants' prayer for sending them for training without any examination as such, should be allowed. the tribunal need not have to go into the point whether those who have been sent had obtained qualifying marks or not. when the applicants did not participate in the selection test, and when the o.a revolves round the same, the focus shall be only on that issue and not on the peripheral issue. hence the r.a lacks any merit. no error apparent on the face of the records could be discerned and as such r.a is dismissed by circulation.
HON'BLE DrK.B.S.RAJAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER
1. Review Application has been considered. The main ground for review is that certain points relating to percentage of qualifying marks fixed for promotion and that 12 persons including the respondents 8 and 10 have failed in their examination, have not been taken into account by the Tribunal.
2. The main issue involved in the O.A is whether the applicants' prayer for sending them for training without any examination as such, should be allowed. The Tribunal need not have to go into the point whether those who have been sent had obtained qualifying marks or not. When the applicants did not participate in the selection test, and when the O.A revolves round the same, the focus shall be only on that issue and not on the peripheral issue. Hence the R.A lacks any merit. No error apparent on the face of the records could be discerned and as such R.A is dismissed by circulation.