KAMAL SHARMA Vs. NATIONAL COUNCIL OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE writ petitioners in W.P. (C) 5433/2007 (hereafter referred to as "departmental candidates") and in W.P. (C) 5471/2011 (hereafter referred to as NCERT) challenge an order of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) dated 23.04.2007 in OA 1479/2006.

(2.) THE brief facts are that the applicant before the CAT (hereafter referred to as "Kotru") joined the NCERT on 24.07.1995, on deputation. He had joined the Department of Telecommunication, Central Government in 1982 and had subsequently joined the NCERT on deputation as a Senior Accountant. Sometime in 1995, the NCERT invited applications from amongst eligible candidates for recruitment to the post of Senior Accountant. Kotru, who was working on deputation, sought for absorption. This request was, however, declined by the NCERT on 16/18.12.1997. The ground for rejection was that there was no 'provision in the Recruitment Rules of the Council for the absorption of a deputationist. Later, however, NCERT added that "However, he may compete in the test of Senior Accountant against the post which are to be filled through open recruitment".

(3.) IN the counter affidavit filed by the NCERT, Kotru's initial request for absorption and the circumstances in which it was declined was not denied. However, NCERT alleged that Kotru and other deputationists did not possess the requisite eligibility conditions as they have not worked in the pay scale of Rs. 4000 -6000 for at least three years. The infirmity in their applications for direct recruitment was that their applications to participate in the selection process was made much after 1995. It was urged that these irregularities came to light on account of the representations of departmental candidates; they have referred to the report of a Committee known as "Satyam Committee". The NCERT also contended that on account of the various irregularities discerned by the Satyam Committees report, the seniority in the grade of Senior Accountant was reviewed. The CAT by its impugned order noticed that Kotru had appeared in the direct recruitment quota and was selected in 1998 and that having published the final seniority list in 2003, the revision made on 19.6.2006 was without affording any opportunity to show cause with the relevant materials.