KAMAL KUMAR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioners are aggrieved by an order dated 17th September, passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench in OA No. 2156/1993.

(2.) The only issue urged before us by learned Counsel for the Petitioners is with regard to the appointment of the Petitioners to the post of Technical Assistants in the Staff Inspection Unit of the Ministry of Finance (Department of Expenditure) of the Government of India. The controversy is with regard to the date of regular appointment.

(3.) According to learned Counsel, the Petitioners should have been shown as regular appointees with effect from 5th October, 1987 and 9th October, 1987 instead of 7th January, 1992. The basis of learned Counsel s argument is that the Petitioners were appointed on the dates in October,1987 on deputation to the Staff Inspection Unit, Ministry of Finance and they met the eligibility criteria for the post of Technical Assistant as per the Recruitment Rules.