UMA VINCENT Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition, petitioner assails the order dated 30th October, 2000, passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal) in OA.No.788/2000, by which the Tribunal dismissed the original application, filed by the petitioner. Petitioner before the Tribunal had challenged, the order of the respondents dated 24th December, 1999, rejecting her representation. Petitioner sought directions for granting her the 7th upgraded post of Chief Matron in the pay scale of Rs.7450-11500 along with all consequential benefits and treat her as having been appointed on the said post from the date respondent No.5 had been promoted i.e. w.e.f., 2nd February, 1999. It may be noted that the petitioner has since retired on 30.9.2000.

(2.) The question arising for consideration in the Writ Petition is whether the seven posts of Chief Matrons introduced, were a result of upgradation upon restructuring of cadre or creation of new posts. Petitioner claims that it was a case of upgradation upon restructuring of the cadre. Therefore in terms of the Supreme Court decisions in All India Non-SC/ST Employees Association (Railway) Vs.V.K.Agarwal and Ors. - Contempt Petition (Civil) No.304/1999 in CA.No.1481/96 and Union of India Vs.V.K.Sirothia (Civil Appeal No.3622/95), (1999) SCC LandS 938, respondents could not have kept one post in the reserved category. Consequently in the absence of reservation, she being eligible, was entitled to be appointed to the said seventh post.

(3.) Judgment was reserved after hearing the petitioner as well as counsel for Respondent No.1 to 4 for some time. Subsequently, it came to our notice that Respondent No.5 had not been issued notice. Accordingly the matter was listed for directions and was reheard after giving respondent no.5 due opportunity of being heard and considering the counter affidavit filed by her.