UNION OF INDIA Vs. AMIT KUMAR HAZRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ONE Amit Kumar Hazra and 25 others approached the Central Administrative Tribunal alleging irregularity in the selection process of Mazdoors by the Military Engineering Service Department of Union of India. They participated in the selection process, however, became unsuccessful. In the petition before the Tribunal various irregularities were highlighted. The principal contention was, however, centered around compliance of the Recruitment Rules. According to the said applicants, for the post of Mazdoor, the authority conducted physical endurance test and as per the rules, the candidates who could pass out the physical eligibility test should be called for interview. However, the authority called each one of them and gave indiscriminating marks in the interview to have selection of their favoured candidates. The Tribunal upset the entire selection process, as accordingly to the Tribunal, the applicants could satisfy about the irregularity. While observing so, the Tribunal, highlighted six issues:-

(2.) THE Tribunal observed, the standard operating procedure was not followed. The Tribunal set aside the entire selection process and directed preparation of fresh merit list as per Annexure-VIII. Hence, this appeal by the Union of India. If we look to the judgement and order impugned, we would find, except generalized remarks, the judgement did not point out any specific irregularity except the case of Suchitra and Sunder Vadivelu. We have verifed the records appearing at the paper book. Mr.Das, learned counsel appearing for the Union of India drew our attention to the record. We find Vadivelu was well within his age limit. Application of Suchitra was received well ahead. Appearing for the respondents, Ms.Zinu, learned counsel, drew our attention to the results trying to demonstrate the discrepancy that we hardly found. The standard operation procedure suggested by the Tribunal was applicable for regular Group-C and Group-D employees, whereas the present recruitment process would relate to Mazdoor.

(3.) MR .Das appearing for the Union of India referred to photographs to show, physical endurance tests were duly held. The authority published the advertisement and conducted the selection process. They were entitled to fix criteria for the post. They were also entitled to fix the method of selection. Unless it is patently illegal or arbitrary, the Court of law would be slow to upset such selection process. We fail to reason, how such process could be upset at the instance of unsuccessful candidates who participated in the selection process without making any grievance out of it.