SMIT REKHA VISHNOI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this petition, the petitioner impugns the order dated 2. 1. 1998 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal (in short the ?tribunal?) in her application refusing her to grant the relief of giving her seniority at serial no. 432-A in the seniority list issued on 1. 1. 1982 wherein her name figures at serial no. 550. Before we advert to the basis on which the petitioner laid her claim in the application under Section 9 of the Administrative Tribunal Act (in short the ?act?), it would be necessary to recapitulate some basis facts.

(2.) THE petitioner joined as an Income-Tax Officer (Group A) on 6. 8. 1977 on the basis of Combined Competitive Examination held by the Union Public Service commission (UPSC ). There were various persons who joined the said service along with the petitioner. Merit list was prepared by the UPSC in respect of all those selected and the petitioner was assigned the place at serial no. 21-A in the said Group.

(3.) NEXT promotion is to the post of Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax. She was considered for this post along with her batch mates of the year 1977 by the departmental Promotion Committee (DPC ). After considering the eligible candidates and on the recommendations of the DPC, the Promotion Order dated 26. 12. 1986 was issued promoting certain Income-Tax (Group A) Senior Scale officers to the post of Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax on officiating basis with effect from the date (as they take over charge until further orders ). The name of the petitioner was, however, missing from this list, though some persons junior to her in her batch were given promotion. Aggrieved by this omission, she submitted a representation dated 27. 1. 1987 seeking review of the decision of the DPC and also praying for promotion to the said post with her seniority intact. This representation was, however, rejected on 3. 3. 1987 stating that her case was considered by the DPC and her name could not be included in the select panel on overall assessment of her record and decision in this behalf was final. The petitioner filed OA No. 1797/1987 before the Tribunal claiming that as per her seniority, her rightful place is between serial no. 21 and 22. This OA was, however, withdrawn by her on 9. 12. 1991. Subsequently, civil List of the year 1991 was issued wherein she was shown at serial no. 550 with 1979 batch. Claiming that she belonged to original batch of 1977 and as a consequence thereof her name should have figured at serial no. 432-A in respect of serial no. 550, she filed OA No. 1753/1993, which has been dismissed by the impugned judgment and order dated 2. 1. 1998 by the Tribunal.