UNION OF INDIA Vs. NEELAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare has challenged the order dated 4th February, 2009 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi in O.A No.1870/2008 titled Mrs.Neelam v. Union of India and ors setting aside the order dated 11th August, 2008 terminating the appointment of the respondent and holding that the appointment of the respondent as Fumigation Worker pursuant to the advertisement dated 25th September, 2003 was made for the said post regularly and could and her appointment to the said post could not be terminated. Brief facts to comprehend the controversies are that pursuant to an advertisement dated 25th September, 2003, respondent applied for the post of Fumigation Worker. After considerable period, after the respondent had applied for the said post, she was directed by communication dated 15th February, 2007 to appear for interview before the petitioners on 26th February, 2007. The communication dated 15th February, 2007 had specified that the appointment to the post of Fumigation Worker will be temporary initially and the respondent will be put on probation and will be regularized as per the rules and regulations of the petitioners.

(2.) Pursuant to the selection to the post of Fumigation Worker in the pay scale of Rs.2550-5-2660-60-3200/- the respondent was appointed and was put on probation for a period of one year. The respondent was directed to report for duty to the Airport Health Officer, Palam Airport, Delhi. The respondent had accepted the terms and joined on 27th February, 2007. On joining, the respondent was medically examined and police verification was also got done and thereafter, respondent continued to work as a Fumigation Worker and completed the period of probation of one year on 27th February, 2008. According to the respondent, after completion of the period of one year she was deemed to be a regular employee of the petitioners.

(3.) The services of the respondent were, however, terminated by order dated 11th August, 2008 without disclosing any reason and without giving any show cause notice or giving a hearing to the respondent as to why her services were liable to be terminated. This was not disputed by the petitioners that the respondent had completed her period of probation. It is also pertinent to note that by letter dated 5th March, 2007 the Airport Health Officer in a communication addressed to the police authorities had stipulated that the respondent has been appointed as a Fumigation Officer on regular basis. After the services of the respondent were terminated without disclosing any reason, the respondent filed an application under Right to Information Act dated 13th August, 2008. Pursuant to the application filed by the respondent under Right to Information Act, it was disclosed that the entire process of the selection has been declared to be invalid/illegal and, therefore, the respondent could not continue as a Fumigation Worker even after completion of her probation period and, therefore, by a simple order of termination his services had been terminated. It was pleaded by the petitioners that for the post advertised in 2003 selection could not be conducted in the year 2007. The petitioners also disclosed that the selection for the post advertised in 2003 was done in 2007 as the post of Fumigation Worker was cleared by the screening committee in the year 2007 and consequently a new advertisement ought to have been issued for filing up the post of Fumigation Worker. Regarding completion of the period of probation, it was asserted that it shall not entitle respondent for any relief. Aggrieved by the order of termination of her services, the respondent filed the original application before the Central Administrative Tribunal which was allowed by the Principal Bench by order dated 4th February, 2009. The Tribunal noted the pleas and contentions of the parties. It was noticed that the respondent is an OBC candidate and was fully eligible and opted for the same and she was appointed in accordance with the rules and regulations. It had also been noted that two vacant posts of Fumigation Workers had accrued on 31st March, 2001 and another post had become available on 31st January, 2002 before the advertisement for filling the post was given on 25th September, 2003.