DIRECTOR GENERAL OF INCOME TAX RESEARCH STATICS PUBLICATION AND PUBLIC RELATION Vs. DINESH CHANDER PANDEY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondents are clamouring for regularisation on the post of LDC but petitioner wants them to appear in a selection examination to be conducted by SSC -en accordance with the Directorate of Income-Tax (Research Statics Publication & Public Relations) Group C & D Recruitment Rules, 1999 (hereinafter called "recruitment rules') vide orders dated 15.9.93 and 21.9.93. CAT has quashed these orders by impugned order dated 15.11.99 and directed petitioner to consider these respondents for regularisation of their service on the post of LDC in consultation with Staff Selection Commission after giving them necessary age relaxation. While doing so. Tribunal has relied upon its earlier orders passed in OA Nos.668, 3.010, 914/88, 985/89 and 1153/91 dated 12.4.91 by placing reliance on a judgment of the Supreme Court.

(2.) Petitioners feel aggrieved of this and have filed this petition for setting aside CAT order and for requiring R-1-10 to go through the prescribed mode of promotion under rules for their substantive promotion on their services on the post of LDC.

(3.) R-1--10 were first appointed as Group-D employees in the Directorate of Income-Tax and then regularised from 21.4.81 to 24.1.86. They were later promoted on the post of LDC on adhoc basis from 1.9.84 to 7.4.86 by various orders which provided that the service rendered by them would not be counted toward their seniority on the promoted post and that they would be liable to be reverted to Group D posts and that their claim for regularisatio'n would not be considered. They were, however, so promoted after being subjected to a typing and written test and continued to hold the post of LDC for as long as 15 to 16 years during which all of them are said to have' passed their regularisation departmental tests.