SUMITRA DEVI Vs. LT GOVERNER OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this writ petition, Petitioner challenges order dated 12. 03. 2003, passed by Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New delhi (for short "the Tribunal"), dismissing her OA No. 545 of 2003. Petitioner also seeks quashing of order dated 26. 10. 1989 passed by the Dy. Commissioner of police, Delhi. By the said order, appointment letter of the Petitioner was cancelled. Petitioner challenged the order before the Tribunal. The Tribunal dismissed the OA as barred by limitation.

(2.) FACTS leading to the present writ petition are: Petitioner belonging to Bawaria Community appeared in the recruitment test held on 13th march, 1989. After passing the examination and the physical endurance test, she was, vide letter dated 21st June, 1989, called for medical examination for the post of "woman constable" in Delhi Police. After the Petitioner was declared medically fit, her appointment and candidature was cancelled vide letter dated 26th October, 1989 on the ground that her name was sponsored by the Employment exchange as "scheduled Tribe" candidate but on verifying the papers it was found that the Petitioner belonged to "bawaria Community" in Haryana State, which is enlisted as Schedule Caste. At the time when the Respondents cancelled her appointment, the controversy as to whether Bawaria Community is to be construed as "scheduled Tribes" or "scheduled Caste" was very much alive. Persons belonging to the said community against whom action was taken had knocked the doors of the court. Petitioner waited for the outcome of the said cases pending in the courts to decide her further course of action. When subsequently she approached the Tribunal to set aside and quash the cancellation letter dated 26th October 1989, the Tribunal dismissed the application on the ground that the applicant had belatedly deserved no consideration.

(3.) IN the writ petition, the Petitioner has submitted that as per the brochure on SC/st issued by the Government of India, Bawaria Community in the Haryana State is treated as Scheduled Caste and not Scheduled Tribe. Rejection of her candidature after the selection and receipt of the appointment letter is wholly illegal. Further the Respondents themselves treated the community in Scheduled Tribe category and have given appointments to the individuals of this community in the Scheduled Tribe category. This practice has been in existence since 1955.