Challa Subbaratnam Vs. the Sr. Superintendent of Post - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
1. heard mr. s. ramakrishna rao, learned counsel for the applicant and mr. g. jaya prakash babu for mrs. p. renuka, learned counsel for the respondents.2. it is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant had appeared for the examination held on 15.07.2001, 29.07.2001 and 25.11.2001 for the post of postman under the obc quota but he has not been appointed though he has obtained very high marks in the written examination.3. the brief facts of the case are that the applicant is working as gds/delivery agent and he appeared for the selection of postman held in june 2001. out of the total vacancies, 50% of the vacancies were earmarked for ed agents for which he contested. by letter dated 03.10.2001, the applicant was asked to submit the caste certificate in the prescribed proforma of obc caste certificate issued by competent authority and the applicant complied with it. however, by the order dated 04.10.2001, that is the very next date, they had announced the results of selection for the cadre of postman among general category as also the sc category and a condition was attached to the said letter that the results for 2 vacancies under obc category were not announced for want of caste/obc certificate obtained from the revenue authorities and that they will be announced on receipt of the prescribed certificates from the candidates. the applicant's plea is that marks secured by him have been intimated to him by the respondent authorities where he scored as paper a34, paper b 25, paper c45 and thus, he had obtained very high marks and so he ought to have been appointed.4. the respondents' plea is that though the examination was held calling for candidates from obc candidates, while announcing results of the successful candidates from among general candidates as also sc candidates, they have specifically provided that the results of the obc candidates would be announced later on, subject to receipt of caste certificate in the prescribed proforma. the postmaster general vide letter dated 11.01.2001 had clarified that promotion of edas belonging to obc to group d/postman is not to be taken up under direct recruitment quota since the reservation to obc was confined only to dr quota and this is the reason for not filling up the obc vacancies till today and the results are not announced. counsel for the respondents have further informed the bench that three candidates belonging to the obc had obtained higher marks as follows:candidate no. 1 - 31 49 46 126candidate no. 2 - 31 45 35 111candidate no. 3 - 34 35 40 109present applicant- 34 25 44 103 5. counsel for the respondents, therefore, submitted that even among the obc candidates, there were three candidates who had secured higher marks than the applicant and the number of vacancies originally were only two and so there was no way that the applicant could claim to be appointed under this category. he further informed that till today no appointment order has been issued to any obc candidate in pursuance of the clarification issued by the cpmg referred to above.6. we have given our careful consideration to all the pleas. we have also perused the records. we would not like to go into the question raised by the applicant regarding correctness of the clarification given by the cpmg as to whether the obc quota would be applicable to direct recruitment or not for the simple reason that in the present case the applicant's plea is that he had obtained higher marks in the examination and he ought to have been appointed which has been found to be incorrect as mentioned in paragraph 4 above. as stated by the learned counsel for the respondents, the applicant ranks 4th in order of merit among the obc candidates. we have also perused the file of the department.7. in the circumstances, we are of the view that the applicant is not entitled to the relief claimed. accordingly, oa fails and deserves to be dismissed.

Judgment:
1. Heard Mr. S. Ramakrishna Rao, learned Counsel for the applicant and Mr. G. Jaya Prakash Babu for Mrs. P. Renuka, learned Counsel for the respondents.

2. It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the applicant that the applicant had appeared for the examination held on 15.07.2001, 29.07.2001 and 25.11.2001 for the post of Postman under the OBC quota but he has not been appointed though he has obtained very high marks in the written examination.

3. The brief facts of the case are that the applicant is working as GDS/Delivery Agent and he appeared for the selection of Postman held in June 2001. Out of the total vacancies, 50% of the vacancies were earmarked for ED Agents for which he contested. By letter dated 03.10.2001, the applicant was asked to submit the caste certificate in the prescribed proforma of OBC caste certificate issued by competent authority and the applicant complied with it. However, by the order dated 04.10.2001, that is the very next date, they had announced the results of selection for the cadre of Postman among General category as also the SC category and a condition was attached to the said letter that the results for 2 vacancies under OBC category were not announced for want of caste/OBC certificate obtained from the revenue authorities and that they will be announced on receipt of the prescribed certificates from the candidates. The applicant's plea is that marks secured by him have been intimated to him by the respondent authorities where he scored as Paper A34, Paper B 25, Paper C45 and thus, he had obtained very high marks and so he ought to have been appointed.

4. The respondents' plea is that though the examination was held calling for candidates from OBC candidates, while announcing results of the successful candidates from among General candidates as also SC candidates, they have specifically provided that the results of the OBC candidates would be announced later on, subject to receipt of caste certificate in the prescribed proforma. The Postmaster General vide letter dated 11.01.2001 had clarified that promotion of EDAs belonging to OBC to Group D/Postman is not to be taken up under direct recruitment quota since the reservation to OBC was confined only to DR quota and this is the reason for not filling up the OBC vacancies till today and the results are not announced. Counsel for the respondents have further informed the Bench that three candidates belonging to the OBC had obtained higher marks as follows:Candidate No. 1 - 31 49 46 126Candidate No. 2 - 31 45 35 111Candidate No. 3 - 34 35 40 109Present applicant- 34 25 44 103 5. Counsel for the respondents, therefore, submitted that even among the OBC candidates, there were three candidates who had secured higher marks than the applicant and the number of vacancies originally were only two and so there was no way that the applicant could claim to be appointed under this category. He further informed that till today no appointment order has been issued to any OBC candidate in pursuance of the clarification issued by the CPMG referred to above.

6. We have given our careful consideration to all the pleas. We have also perused the records. We would not like to go into the question raised by the applicant regarding correctness of the clarification given by the CPMG as to whether the OBC quota would be applicable to direct recruitment or not for the simple reason that in the present case the applicant's plea is that he had obtained higher marks in the examination and he ought to have been appointed which has been found to be incorrect as mentioned in paragraph 4 above. As stated by the learned Counsel for the respondents, the applicant ranks 4th in order of merit among the OBC candidates. We have also perused the file of the department.

7. In the circumstances, we are of the view that the applicant is not entitled to the relief claimed. Accordingly, OA fails and deserves to be dismissed.