RAJESH VAROON Vs. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH: SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT, UNION OF INDIA, THROUGH: SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL & TRAINING, CENTRAL PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT AND THE SUPERINTENDENT, ENGINEER, TRAINING INSTITUTE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE controversy in all these Original Applications is with regard to the cut -off dates to reckon the educational qualifications prescribed in the Notice dated 27.10.2011 issued by the Respondent-Central Public Works Department (CPWD for short) based on which the Limited Departmental Competitive Examination (LDCE for short) for appointment to the posts of Junior Engineer (Civil & Electrical) was held on 05.02.2012. The aforesaid clauses in the said notice are reproduced as under :-

(2.) THE Applicant has already completed the eligibility criterion of 5 years service in the department. But on account of the arbitrary change in eligibility criterion with regard to the cut-off date for possessing the educational qualification, he was not considered eligible to participate in the selection process. He has, therefore, sought for an order/direction for quashing the notification dated 27.10.2011 and for a further direction to the Respondent to issue a fresh notification for filling up the 5% posts of Junior Engineer including those of the year 2005-06 and to pass an order directing the respondents to fill up the vacancies of each year by the candidates who have completed 5 years of service and fulfilled the eligibility qualification.

(3.) THEREAFTER , some of the candidates who have been adversely affected by the aforesaid order of this Tribunal filed MA No. 3223/2012 in this OA seeking its modification/review to the extent of allowing that the result of the examination held on 05.02.2012 in terms of notification dated 27.10.2011 to be declared and the promotions based on the said result be made against all the vacancies which are directed to be recalculated by this Tribunal vide aforesaid order dated 16.10.2012 by determining eligibility of the candidates regarding qualification and 5 years of regular service on the last date of receipt of application. However, vide order dated 07.02.2013, the said MA was dismissed as not maintainable. Thereafter, some other candidates who were adversely affected by the aforesaid order also filed RA No. 348/2012 seeking a review of the said order but the same was also dismissed vide order dated 16.10.2012 as not maintainable.