MAHARAJ SINGH Vs. CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has challenged judgment dtd. 17/5/2022, rendered by Central Administrative Tribunal, Allahabad, Circuit Bench Nainital in Transfer Application No. 25 of 2018. By the said judgment, challenge thrown by the petitioner to the order dtd. 3/10/2013 whereby his representation claiming temporary status was rejected. Operative portion of the impugned judgment is reproduced below:

(2.) It is not in dispute that petitioner was engaged as seasonal employee to discharge duties as khalasi in Central Water Commission in the year 1985. According to him, he discharged duties as such, though with artificial breaks, till 2004, and he was disengaged from service w.e.f. 15/10/2004 without any rhyme or reason. Petitioner challenged his disengagement by filing Writ Petition No. 658 of 2005 (SS); the said writ petition, however, was decided on 29/11/2012 with direction to the competent authority to take decision on the representation, to be submitted by petitioner, within eight weeks, by ignoring the stand taken by respondent No. 4 in their counter affidavit.

(3.) Petitioner submitted representation in terms of the order passed by learned Single Judge in Writ Petition (S/S) No. 658 of 2005, which however was rejected by Superintending Engineer, Central Water Commission vide order dtd. 3/10/2013. In the rejection order, it was mentioned that petitioner has crossed the upper age limit for entry into group-C post as per the applicable recruitment rules, therefore, the matter was referred to Department of Personnel and Training for relaxation. DoPT, however, turned down the proposal submitted for exemption to petitioner with the remark that "as a policy, we do not consider relaxation in age limit and qualification prescribed for direct recruitment."