UNION OF INDIA Vs. MITHLESH TYAGI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The challenge in this writ petition, filed by the Union of India through its functionaries, is to an order dated January 23, 2020, passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi ('Tribunal', for short) in Original Application No.2164/2019 ('OA', for short) whereby the Tribunal has allowed the OA filed by the respondent herein by directing in paragraph 9, as under:

(2.) The facts as noted from the record are that on January 22, 1983, the respondent was initially appointed as Hindi Pradhyapak ('HP', for short) on ad-hoc basis. It is an admitted case of the parties that, on the date of her appointment on ad-hoc basis as HP, she was beyond the age limit, prescribed under the Recruitment Rules, i.e., 30 years and that the regular recruitment of the candidates had to be done through the Staff Selection Commission ('SSC', for short).

(3.) The case of the petitioners was that due to exigency, respondent was appointed on ad-hoc basis as HP which appointment continued from time to time till November 30, 1989, when her services were disengaged. Thereafter, the respondent filed OA 2239/1990, before the Tribunal and the said OA was disposed of on July 10, 1992 by the Tribunal directing the petitioners to consider the case of the respondent for appointment anywhere in India. The respondent was again appointed as HP on ad-hoc basis on February 8, 1993 which appointment continued till May 31, 2008 with the same officiating grade till she attained the age of 60 years which is otherwise, an age of superannuation.