NARANDER KUMAR Vs. DIRECTOR GENERAL, ALL INDIA RADIO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE applicant was engaged as a casual labour in Doordarshan on 01.09.1989. He met with an accident on 27.06.1989 as a result of which he was hospitalized. He was discharged from the hospital on 01.06.1990 and reported for duty. According to him, he was not allowed to resume work. On 12.07.1990 he made a representation to the respondents but he was again disengaged from 01.12.1990. The applicant challenged the action of the respondents vide OA -379/1991. This was disposed of by the Tribunal on 13.11.1995 with the following directions: -

(2.) NOW the grievance of the applicant is that the respondents have given temporary status to a junior of the applicant, namely, Sh. Balbir Prasad vide their order dated 11.12.2009. Aggrieved by the same, the applicant made a representation on 07.08.2012 to DG, AIR. However, his request was not considered. He again made a similar representation on 12.04.2013 but the same was also not considered. He has, therefore, filed this O.A. seeking the following relief: -

(3.) WE have considered the submissions of both sides and have perused the material on record. As per the applicant he was initially engaged as casual labour in the year 1989 whereas Sh. Balbir Prasad was engaged in 1992. In that respect the applicant was senior to Sh. Balbir Prasad. However, this Tribunal in its order dated 13.11.1995 passed in OA -379/1991 had clearly directed that preference be given to those who have put in longer period of service than others and had also further directed that broken period of service shall not be reckoned for the purpose of determining the total length of service. The respondents have stated that the applicant had put in 41.5 days of work as compared to 150 days of work put in by Sh. Balbir Prasad. Clearly, therefore, preference has to be given to Sh. Balbir Prasad as compared to the applicant in terms of the orders of this Tribunal