DIRECTOR GENERAL Vs. CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned counsel appearing for the parties. Though the matter was listed for considering the question of vacating the order of stay, since the question involved in the miscellaneous petition is the same as in the writ petition itself, on consent of the counsel appearing for the parties, we have heard the writ petition on merits and the same is being disposed of by this order.

(2.) THE present writ petition is directed against the judgment of the Central Administrative Tribunal in O. A. No. 1085 of 2002, wherein the Tribunal has given a direction to the present petitioners to consider the case of the present second respondent for upgradation to the post of Library and Information Officer within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the order. The facts giving rise to the present writ petition may now be stated in brief.

(3.) THE second respondent herein, who holds a P. G. Degree in Arts and also a P. G. Degree in Library and Information Science, joined as Senior Librarian in the Tuberculosis Research Center, I. C. M. R. , Chennai on 5. 2. 1999. Pursuant to the recommendation of the Fourth Pay Commission, the pay scale of the second respondent was revised and ultimately, the second respondent was also re-designated as Assistant Library and Information Officer in the pay scale of Rs. 2000-3500. It was asserted by the second respondent in the original application that he has eleven years' experience. Relying upon the letter in O. M. No. 19 (1)/ic/86 dated 24. 7. 1990 issued by the Ministry of Finance with reference to the Report of the Review Committee on Library Staff under the purview of the Central Government, particularly relating to Paragraph 4, the second respondent had filed an application for being upgraded to the post of Library and Information Officer in the pay scale of Rs. 3000-4500. In the said application, it was contended by the second respondent that as an incumbent in the post of Assistant Library and Information Officer, he should be considered for appointment to a higher scale as he had the required qualification as well as experience as laid down in Annexure-I to the aforesaid letter.