Gurvinder Singh Vs. Union of India, Through Secretary Cum Director General, New Delhi and Others - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
administrative tribunals act, 1985 - section 19 -rajwant sandhu, member (a). 1. this original application has been filed under section 19 of the administrative tribunals act, 1985, seeking the following relief:- 8 (i). surplus list (annexure a-3) whereby the name of the applicant was not included as surplus candidate from punjab circle despite the fact that the applicant had cleared the examination for the post of inspector and had secured 6th position with 306 marks be quashed. (ii). issue direction to the respondents to promote / appoint the applicant as inspector as there were 73 vacancies available out of which 53 vacancies were meant for general category at the time of declaring of result, and as per (annexure a-8) total 117 candidates were adjusted against surplus vacancy and thus even after the issuance of letter (annexure a-8) respondent no.1 could have adjusted the applicant against the unfilled vacancy as applicant obtained comparatively good marks in departmental exam and was ready for appointment in other circle as inspector post. (iii). direct the respondents to fix the seniority of the applicant on the post of inspector from the date candidates having less marks were promoted as inspector. (iv).          direct the respondents to grant the arrears of pay of the post of inspector from the date candidates securing less marks as compared to the applicant has been promoted to the post of inspector. 2. brief facts of the matter are that the applicant was selected as postal assistant in patiala division in punjab circle in may 1999.  during the course of training, options were invited by the postal department for deputation / field service in army postal units.  the applicant was selected in the army postal service and on 25.09.1999, he joined as warrant officer at army postal service training centre, kamptee and he  continued to serve with different postal units of the army.  in 2007, respondent no.1 vide letter dated 13.04.2007 made a provision to allot unfilled vacancies of inspector post in different circles with surplus qualified candidates of other circles since notified vacancies in some circles could not be filled because of non-availability of qualified candidates in these circles (annexure a-1). 3. since the applicant had completed more than 5 years of service as postal assistant and had already availed 3 attempts for departmental promotion examination, he applied for appearing in the test for promotion to the post of inspector post-2009.  while submitting the application, he gave his option in the application itself that in case he qualifies the examination and vacancy is not available in the circle, he is ready to be posted out of the circle.  the applicant appeared in the examination for the post of inspector at calcutta on 04/06.01.2010. the result of the examination was declared on 05.10.2010 and the applicant secured 6th position in general category in punjab circle having secured 306 marks (annexure a-2).  in punjab circle, there were 5 vacancies of inspector of which 3 were for general category, 1 for sc and 1 for st as is evident from the result of inspector pertaining to punjab circle (annexure a-2).  because of non inclusion of the name of the applicant in the surplus list (annexure a-3) by respondents no.1 and 2, the applicant was not adjusted / appointed in other circles despite the option that had been given by him at the time of filling the application form and persons who had secured less marks as compared to the applicant were promoted as inspector whereas the applicant is still working as postal assistant. 4. in the grounds for relief, it has been stated as follows:- (i).  non inclusion of the name of the applicant in the surplus list (annexure a-3) prepared by respondents no.1 and 2 was illegal, arbitrary and violative of article 14 of the constitution of india. (ii).since it was decided in principle to fill the vacancies in other circles from amongst successful candidates, keeping in view the fact that notified vacancies used to remain unfilled in some circles because of non-availability of successful candidates in these circles and the applicant having secured 6th position in general category in punjab circle, if he could not be adjusted in punjab circle he was entitled to be considered for appointment in those circles where there was deficiency. (iii).as per (annexure a-3), there were 73 vacancies available out of which 53 vacancies where meant for general category.  thus, even after the issuance of letter (annexure a-8), respondent no.1 could have adjusted the applicant against the unfilled vacancy. 5. in the written statement filed on behalf of the respondents, it has been stated that the benefits of surplus qualified candidates scheme are not available to the applicant as officials on deputation to army postal service are accorded separate benefits of relaxed standards  a special concession enunciated in dg pandt letter no.7/29/65-spb-ii dated 7.06.1965 and para 9(b) of rule 279/1 of pandt manual, volume iv (annexure r-1).  further, note 2 below department of posts, inspector post recruitment rules, 2001 notified on 26.04.2001 further prescribes that candidates who are serving or having served in army postal service may be given such concessions in regard to age limit, maximum number of chances to appear in the departmental examination for appointment to those posts on obtaining the minimum qualifying marks as may be decided by the central government from time to time.  these concessions are in vogue since 1965, even before introduction of surplus qualified candidates scheme in 2007 (annexure r-2). 6. the applicant was appointed as postal assistant on 10.09.1999 at patiala postal division, punjab circle and enrolled on deputation to army postal service on 25.09.1999.  the applicant while serving on deputation in army postal service appeared for the limited departmental competitive examination of inspector post for the year 2009 for the vacancies of the year 2009 held on 04/06.01.2010.  since the examination was / is competitive and the applicant could not get the position in merit as per the notified vacancies for the respective year in punjab circle, hence he was not selected. 5 vacancies for inspector post cadre were notified for the year 2009 in punjab circle and the applicant could not be selected because he secured less marks as compared to the marks obtained by the successful candidates.  merit list and marks obtained by each candidate in the examination have been annexed by the applicant as annexure a-2 and the name of the applicant figures at sl.no.6 in the list.  apparently, the applicant did not secure the merit position vis-a-vis vacancies notified for the punjab circle, therefore, he was declared qualified in army postal service under relaxed standard, applicable to officials on deputation to army postal service.7. it is further stated that the department vide letter no.a-34020/01/2007-de dated 13.04.2007 enunciated a scheme for allotment of surplus qualified candidates who have qualified from their respective circle but could not attain the merit required for the notified vacancies.  it has categorically been mentioned in para 3 of the scheme that the surplus qualified candidates who are available over and above the selected candidates in a circle, can be allotted to the deficient circles. in the ldce of inspector of posts, after completion of the first stage of drawing up the circle-wise list of successful candidates (which is followed hitherto), an all india merit list, in descending order, strictly based on the marks secured by the surplus qualified candidates from all the circles for each category will be drawn up.  the number of candidates in this list shall be equal to the combined unfilled vacancies of all the circles.  this scheme was not extended to such qualified candidates who were on deputation to army postal service right from the year of introduction i.e. 2007 to 2009 as the candidates working in army postal service were already provided and enjoyed a special concession concessions applicable for army postal service personnel as provided in dg pandt letter no.7/29/65-spb-ii dated 07.06.1965 and para 9(b) of rule 279/1 of pandt manual, volume iv and rules 85-89 of appendix 23 of pandt manual volume iv, the same is extracted hereunder:- (i). candidates working in the army postal service who have obtained the minimum qualifying marks and who have completed three years service as junior commissioned officer (jco) on the date of the examination will be brought on the approved list below all candidates (including those belonging to sc / st) declared successful in that examination and their positions in the approved list inter se will be determined by the order of merit in the examination. (ii).qualified army postal service candidates who have not completed three years service as jcos, on the date of the examination will be brought on the approved list below all the candidates (including those belonging to sc/st) who have been declared successful in the last examination held before the date on which they completed three years service as jcos.  their positions inter se will be determined by the dates on which they completed three years service as jcos. (iii). a qualified army postal service candidate who leaves the army postal service before completing three years service as jco will not be eligible to be placed on the approved list. from this, it was clear that army postal service personnel have been  provided double chances for promotion to inspector post, first one through limited departmental competitive examination by securing merit position and second one is, promotion under relaxed standard when the qualified candidates do not fit into the merit. 8. arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties were heard.  learned counsel for the applicant reiterated the facts and grounds taken in the oa and stated that as per the examination notice at (annexure a-1), there was nothing to show that persons who are on deputation to the army postal services were not eligible to be covered by the scheme regarding surplus candidates and hence the claim of the applicant for being considered for promotion as inspector post on the basis of his performance in the departmental examination for the year 2009 and being treated as a surplus candidate and being considered for appointment in a circle where there was deficiency had been wrongly rejected. 9. learned counsel for the respondents stated that the scheme for allotment of surplus qualified candidates had not been impugned through the oa.  right from the inception of the scheme, the same was not held applicable to candidates from the army postal service.  the candidates from the army postal service were eligible for age relaxation and also could avail of more attempts to clearing the promotion examination and if they were to be covered under the surplus scheme they would be getting double benefit. 10. we have given our thoughtful consideration to the matter and perused carefully the pleadings of the parties, the material on record and heard arguments advanced at length.   we are not convinced that the scheme circulated vide dg posts, new delhi, letter dated 13.04.2007 places any bar on the candidates from the army postal service who have qualified the examination to be considered for deployment in circles where there is a deficiency of selected candidates. as such the oa is allowed and the respondent department is directed to consider the claim of the applicant for being assigned to a circle where there is deficiency of inspector posts selected through the 2009 examination, in accordance with application filed by the applicant before appearing for this examination. such consideration may be completed within three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order being served upon the respondents. no costs.