SATISH CHANDRA Vs. U O I

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both these petitions arise out of common orders passed by Tribunal in OA No. 1998/99 dated 2.11.2000 and OAs 2401/2001 & 2402/ 2001 dated 4.2.2002 and 9.8.2002 dismissing the last two OAs filed by the petitioners and are being disposed of by this order.

(2.) The case of both petitioners is similar and identical on all fours. They were working as EDDAs at Etawah since 1982. They later took the examination of Postman/Village Postman against the vacancies for the year 1997 held on 23.11.1997. They were selected but could not be appointed against the vacancies of Etawah Division as these vacancies were filed up by more meritorious candidates for the 1997 vacancies. Some posts of 1997, however, remained unfilled in other divisions due to non-availability of qualified candidates and a decision was taken to fill up these posts by the surplus candidates of 1997 examination. Both these petitioners were accordingly allotted to Bulandshahar Division against the unfilled vacancies of 1997 by orders dated 12.2.1999, 18.2.1999 and 19.2.1999 passed by respondents. They were then appointed as temporary Postman and posted as officiating Village Postman at Chhatari and Debai respectively. They were later made to undergo training and after they were working at their posts, one Bishamber Singh, who v/as working in Bulandshahar Division and who was also a candidate for appointment to the post of Postman/Village Postman in subsequent 1998 examination filed OA No. 1998/99 challenging the posting of outsiders like petitioners in Bulandshahar Division on the ground that it had deprived them of appointment to the post of Postman/ Village Postman in Bulandshahar Division though they had qualified the examination. Petitioners were not impleaded as parties to this OA which was otherwise opposed by official respondents justifying their action on the ground that department was competent to fill the unfilled vacancies of a particular year in other divisions by the surplus candidates of the examination held in that year. The case of respondents, however, did not find favour and the Tribunal quashed the posting of these two petitioners to Bulandshahar Division by order dated 2.11.2000 holding:-

(3.) While all this was going on, both petitioners had sought return to their home division Etawah where they were working at their stations when they were suddenly ordered to be relieved pursuant to the order passed by Tribunal in Bishamber Singh's OA No.1998/ 99. They promptly approached the Tribunal and filed their own OA Nos.2401/2002 & 2402/2002 asking for quashing of their relieving orders and their continuation on the post of Postman/Village Postman at their places. These OAs were opposed by respondents on the ground that action taken by them was pursuant to orders passed by the Tribunal in Bishamber Singh's case. Both these OAs were accordingly dismissed on this with Tribunal obliquely suggesting that petitioners should have challenged the Tribunal order in Bishamber Singh's case.