SATISH KUMAR SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER , Satish Kumar Singh is before this Court questioning the validity of the order dated 06.05.2002 passed by Central Administrative Tribunal allowing the Original Application No.302 of 1997 (Ashok Kumar Singh Vs. Union of India and others) and resultantly the appointment of petitioner as Extra Departmental Branch Post Master Teusa, Itaunja, District Lucknow has been quashed.

(2.) BRIEF background of the case is that Hari Narayan Singh, father of the petitioner retired from the post of Extra Departmental Branch Post Master (in short EDBPM) on 31.12.1996 and prior to it in anticipation of vacancy Notification has been issued on 23.05.1995 by Senior Superintendent of Post Offices, Lucknow inviting application for offering appointment on the post of EDBPM. Pursuant to the said invitation in question petitioner as well as contesting respondent no. 4 Ashok Kumar Singh S/o late Hari Narain Singh were nominated as candidate by Employment Exchange for consideration of their candidature and selection proceedings were held and select list was published wherein respondent no. 4 was selected and placed at serial No. 1 of select list and as far as petitioner is concerned, he was placed at serial no. 2 and thereafter it appears that report had been called for in the direction of character verification exercise and claim of Ashok Kumar Singh, respondent no. 4 has been non -suited on the ground of his involvement in criminal case and the petitioner who was placed as serial no. 2 has been offered appointment on 01.07.1997 and since then petitioner has been performing and discharging duties as EDBPM.

(3.) ASHOK Kumar Singh being aggrieved by the said treatment metted to him by not offering appointment to him has proceeded to file Original Application No. 302 of 1997 before the Central Administrative Tribunal hereinafter referred to in short as "CAT" and in the said Original application in question, petitioner has been arrayed as respondent no. 4 and pursuant to notice issued, petitioner has filed response by filing counter affidavit justifying the action taken in his favour as valid action bereft of any favourable treatment being extended to him.