POONAM SINHA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) . This writ petition is directed against a jpdgment and order dated 07.12.1999 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi ( hereinafter for the sake of brevity referred to as, 'the Tribunal') in O.A. No. 2325 of 1998 whereby and whereunder the Original Application filed by the respondent No. 3 herein claiming seniority was allowed.

(2.) . The basic fact of the matter is not in dispute. The petitioner and the respondent No.3 herein pursuant to an advertisement issued by the respondent No. 2 for the posts of 'Data Entry Operator' applied therefor along with other eligible candidates. Both of them were selected by the Selection Board and in the select list, name of the respondent No. 3 was at serial No. 3, whereas that of the petitioner was at serial No. 1. The petitioner herein was appointed on 01.01.1990. An offer for appointment of the respondent No. 3, however, was sent on 30.12.1987, clause 2 whereof is in the following terms :.-

(3.) . On or about 17.01.1991, the Central Government in exercise of its power conferred upon it under the proviso appended to Article 309 of the Constitution of India made rules known as Lal Bahadur Shastri National Academy of Administration Data Entry Operator Grade 'B' Recruitment Rules ( hereinafter for the sake of brevity referred to as, 'the said Rules'). Rule 4 of the said Rules provides for the manner in which inter-se seniority is to be determined, which reads thus :-