UNION OF INDIA Vs. SHILPI GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These writ petitions have been filed by the petitioners, challenging the Order dtd. 26/4/2024 passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the learned 'Tribunal') in O.A. No. 1987/2023, titled Mrs. Shilpi Gupta v. Union of India and Anr.; O.A. No. 2081/2023, titled Ms. Arti v. Union of India and Anr.; and, O.A. No. 2082/2023, titled Ms. Neha v. Union of India and Anr., whereby the learned Tribunal allowed the said O.A.s filed by the respondents herein, with the following directions:

(2.) Since all three petitions are based on similar facts and circumstances, and raise common questions of facts and law, they are being considered together. For the sake of brevity, reference will be made to the facts of W.P. (C) 15405/2022.

(3.) On 23/7/2001, the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) issued an Office Memorandum (OM) stating that no appointment shall be made on an ad-hoc basis from the open market. In spite of the same, in the year 2012, the learned Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) requisitioned suitable candidates through the Directorate of Employment for filling up the post of Stenographer Grade-D in the pay scale of PB-1 (Rs.5200.00"20200) with Grade Pay of Rs.2400.00, on an ad-hoc basis.