TAPAN KUMAR DEO Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Vide the present petition, the petitioner has challenged the decision of Appointments Committee of the Cabinet (ACC) declining the proposal of appointment of the Petitioner as Presiding Officer in the Debt Recovery Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as "the DRT") at Aurangabad, as reflected by information submitted by the respondent No.l in this Court on 19.11.2018 by a letter dated 15.11.2018 of respondent No.2 wherein stated that "The appointment Committee has declined the proposal for appointment of Petitioner to the post of Presiding Officer in Debt Recovery Tribunal, at Aurangabad", however, without giving any reasons for declining the proposal.

(2.) The Petitioner is also challenging the order dated 20.05.2019 passed by Director, ACC, declining to consider the representation made by the petitioner.

(3.) Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner has a right for an appointment to the post of Presiding Officer of Debt Recovery Tribunal at Aurangabad as he was selected for the said post as per the Debt Recovery Tribunal (Procedure for Appointment as Presiding Officer of the Tribunal) Rules, 1998 (Appointment Rules) made under the provisions of Recovery of Debts due to Banks and Financial institutions Act, 1993(DRT Act).