SRI.G.VENKATACHALAM Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner herein was initially appointed as the Examiner - II. Thereafter, he was promoted as the Examiner - I. The initial appointment was on 09.01.1980. The petitioner reached the age of superannuation, after two promotions from the date of initial appointment, on 14.06.2014. In the year 2004, he made a representation inter-alia alleging that he should be treated on par with the Section Officer Post, which is a feeder category post of Deputy Director. As the representation made by the petitioner was rejected, he filed Original Application before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Calcutta with the following reliefs:

(2.) The petitioner appears in person and submits that the rules, namely, Armed Forces Headquarters Civil Services Rules, 2001 is unconstitutional being ultravirus of fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 16, 16(1) and 21 of the Constitution of India. According to him, merely because the petitioner hails from a different cadre, he cannot be treated on par to the feeder category to the Section Officer to the cadre of Deputy Director. Therefore, he seeks quashment of the rules.

(3.) The learned Standing Counsel for the first respondent would submit that admittedly the cadre of Examiner, in which the petitioner was appointed is distinct and different. It is not the feeder category to the post of Deputy Director. The duties and responsibilities to the post of Examiner is different. The post of the Examiner is a technical post, whereas the Deputy Director is the promotional post of Section Officers, who are directly recruited on the basis of Civil Service Examination conducted by the UPSC every year. Apart from this, the posts of Section Officer are also filled up by promotion from assistant grade. Therefore, looking from any perspective the petitioner is not entitled to be promoted to the post of Deputy Director.