RAJ KUNWAR Vs. DELHI JAL BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner by way of this petition is seeking quashing of the order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') in TA No. 367/2009 dated 09.12.2009 whereby the Tribunal has dismissed the application filed by the petitioner seeking directions against the respondents to consider his case also, being a member of the Select Panel prepared by the respondents in 1983 comprising of 83 persons of which the petitioner was the last person on the plea that as per the Office Memorandum dated 08.02.1982, it was decided by the respondents that the select panel prepared would remain in existence till such time the entire panel is exhausted even in relation to future vacancies.

(2.) A writ petition was filed by the petitioner along with one Jai Kumar as he wanted his selection to the post of Junior Engineer (Electrial & Maintenance) classified as a category 'C' post to be filled by selection while working as Work Assistant/ Work Mistry in the department of Water Supply and Sewage Disposal under the Municipal Corporation of Delhi, later transferred to Delhi Jal Board. The writ petition was transferred to the Tribunal. In the said petition, they sought their appointment in respect of vacancies which arose in 1987 based upon the Circular of 1982 on the basis of selection held in the year 1983 and prayed for the following directions: (a) directions for appointing the petitioners to the post of JE (E&M) on the basis of their earlier selection. (b) directions restraining the respondents from holding fresh selection for the posts of JE (E&M) and (c) any other relief deemed fit

(3.) The claim of the first applicant, namely, Jai Kishore was dropped as he stood appointed. To support his case, the petitioner also filed an additional affidavit on 24.08.2009 stating therein that in 1983 out of the Select Panel, initially 51 persons were appointed from the General Category and 13 were appointed in the reserved category. In 1985, 20 vacancies of General Category and 10 vacancies of SC candidates which arose subsequently were also filled up from the select panel. However, the case of the petitioner was not considered. It was submitted that since the name of the petitioner is still on the panel he is entitled to be selected for any vacancy which would arise in future including the vacancy which arose in 1987.