I.C.A.R Vs. AMAR NATH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HAVING heard learned counsel for the parties, we find no reason to interfere with the impugned decision dated November 02, 2000 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal directing writ petitioner to pay salary to the respondent in the scale applicable to a Cook.

(2.) IT is not in dispute that the writ petition, I.C.A.R. through its Subordinate Office I.A.R.I. sent a requisition to the Employment Exchange to forward names of persons registered with the Employment Exchange and desirous of being employed as a Cook. Amongst others, the Employment Exchange forwarded the name of the respondent who had got himself registered with the Employment Exchange and on March 5, 1981, I.A.R.I. conducted an interview and selected respondent as a Cook and after appointing him started paying salary to him in the scale applicable to a Beldar.

(3.) THIS led the respondent to approach the Central Administrative Tribunal highlighting unfair employment practice adopted by I.C.A.R. i.e. requisitioning people for the post of a Cook but paying them salary as a Beldar notwithstanding that post of Cook is sanctioned in I.C.A.R. and its Subordinate Office I.A.R.I.