PARVEEN KUMAR, ASSISTANT CONTROLLER OF PATENTS & DESIGNSM NEW DELHI Vs. CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed against the order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chennai Bench in O.A.No.1111 of 2016 dtd. 8/6/2018.

(2.) There is a post called Examiner of Patents in the respondent Department viz., The Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks. For the year 2012-2013, selection had been made and provisional selection list was issued on 14/1/2013. Thereafter, a draft seniority list was issued on 27/3/2014, in between, the issue was whether the seniority list drawn by them must be on the basis of raw marks obtained by the candidates, who belongs to various subjects or on the basis of derived marks after normalization of various subjects in order to remove the subject bias.

(3.) Ultimately, the plea raised by the group of selectees, who wanted to implement the normalization exercise since was adopted or accepted, accordingly the normalization exercise undertaken, pursuant to which, a final selection list was issued on 28/5/2015. The said list was questioned by the group of selectees before the Central Administrative Tribunal and filed the said Original Application.