UNION OF INDIA Vs. CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A short and interesting question arises for consideration in this application.

(2.) The respondent Nos. 2 to 4 herein who were applicants in O.A.No. 170 of 1995 are graduates. An advertisement bearing No. 391 of 1988. was published in the Employment News dated 23-7-1988 for appointment to the post of Data Entry Operator; wherefor the desired qualifications were: (1) Matriculation; (2) training in data entry operation; (3) Data entry speed of not less than 8000 key depressions per hour (free of error).

(3.) The said advertisement was issued purported to be in terms of a proposal of Central Board of Direct Taxes dated 22-7-1988. The respondent Nos. 2 to 4 herein were appointed in the same post. The amendment to the Income Tax Department (Attached and Subordinate Offices) Data Entry Operators Recruitment Rules, 1988 came into force from 13-8-1988 whereby and whereunder the qualification for holding the said post was brought down from graduation to matriculation.