UNION OF INDIA Vs. ARYA SREE T.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Respondents 1 to 3 in O.A.No.17/2019 on the file of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ernakulam Bench have filed this Original Petition challenging the final order dated 26.9.2019 in that Original Application. The applicant, who is the first respondent herein had filed O.A.No.17/2019 praying inter alia to quash Annexure-A12 communication through which her request for allocation to the Kerala cadre of the Indian Forest Service was rejected and for a direction to allot her to the Kerala Cadre.

(2.) Briefly, the case of the 1st respondent before the Tribunal was that she was selected to the Indian Forest Service (IFS) by the Union Public Service Commission through examinations conducted in the year 2016. She secured Rank No.18 amongst the list of persons found eligible for appointment to the IFS and belongs to the General Category. One Surjith P., who is the 3rd respondent herein secured Rank No.80 amongst the list of persons found eligible for appointment to the IFS and belongs to the Other Backward Community (OBC) category. During the medical examination, it was found that the 3rd respondent was unfit for appointment on the ground of not meeting the minimum height requirements. Out of the three people from Kerala who qualified for IFS in that year (including the aforesaid 3rd respondent), only the 1 st respondent and one Harikrishnan P.J., who is also a General Category candidate with Rank No.53 were given letters of offer to join the IFS. On the basis of the Cadre Allocation Policy applicable in the relevant year, there was one insider vacancy (to be filled up by a candidate whose home state is Kerala) and three outsider vacancies (to be filled up by persons whose home State is not Kerala). The said insider vacancy was notified as being set apart to be filled up with a Scheduled Caste Candidate. As per the policy, if there is no Schedule Caste Candidate, it gets converted as one available for a Scheduled Tribe Candidate and, if a Scheduled Tribe Candidate is also not available, it gets converted to be filled up by an OBC candidate and still further, if no OBC candidate is available, the said vacancy is converted to be filled up by a candidate belonging to the General Category. It is the specific case of the 1st respondent that no insider candidate was allocated to Kerala in the relevant year. This, according to the 1 st respondent was on account of the fact that the OBC candidate, who qualified in the examination, namely, the 3rd respondent, who would have otherwise obtained the insider vacancy on account of the absence of any SC/ST candidate, was found ineligible for reasons indicated earlier. The 1 st respondent, therefore, claimed that in the absence of SC/ST/OBC candidates, the insider vacancy for the relevant year should have been filled up by a General Candidate and since the 1 st respondent had obtained the 18th rank, it should have been offered to her.

(3.) The claim as aforesaid of the 1 st respondent was opposed by the present petitioners principally on the ground that the 1 st respondent has no right to claim for inter cadre transfer from the Maharashtra cadre to which she had been allotted, to the Kerala cadre. As her allocation to the Maharashtra cadre was in accordance with the Cadre Allocation Policy of 2008, the 1st respondent cannot be considered for allocation to Kerala. However, it was admitted that the insider vacancy available for the relevant year ought to have been filled up by the 3rd respondent but it was not so filled up and remained vacant on account of the 3rd respondent being declared unfit to hold the post on account of 'substandard height'.