UNION OF INDIA Vs. HASYA RANJAN SAHOO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition has been filed against the judgment and order dated 6th August, 2004 passed in O.A. No.456 of 2003 by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, quashing the impugned order of termination from service of the petitioner passed by the reviewing authority from the post of GDS Packer -cum -Mail Carrier of Patapol Sub -Post Office under the Superintendent of Post Offices, Cuttack City Division.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that applications were invited from General category candidates for appointment on the post of Gramin Dak Sevak Mail Carrier/Pkt., Patapol Sub -Post Office vide advertisement dated 04.03.2002. It was mentioned therein that physically handicapped persons can also apply, for whom 3% of the total Gramin Dak Sevak Posts are earmarked at the rate 1% each in 3 different categories, i.e., blind , deaf and orthopaedically handicapped. The selection was held in which 39 candidates participated; out of whom, 29 candidates failed to fulfil one or more essential conditions of eligibility. All of them were kept out normal zone of consideration for selection. Thereafter, the selecting authority considered that only 10 including one physically handicapped person out of 39 candidates, namely, C.K. Ray, had fulfilled all the conditions of eligibility. But the selection committee found the petitioner as the most meritorious candidate, as it was not mentioned in the advertisement that physically handicapped candidates would be preferred.

(3.) THE stand of the instant petitioners is that since the selection and appointment of the opposite party was challenged by one Tapan Kumar Nayak, an unsuccessful candidate, before the Tribunal by filing O.A. No.331 of 2002, the next higher authority (reviewing authority) found that the selection of the opposite party was made erroneously in contravention of the departmental rules and, therefore, his services were terminated by giving him one months pay in lieu of one months notice, as required under the Rules, with effect from 01.08.2003. It has also been submitted by the learned Assistant Solicitor General that two physically handicapped candidates were to be appointed vide Memo dated 31.11.2001, due to which termination order was passed. He also submitted that in the notification dated 04.03.2002 inviting applications to fill up the posts, it was required to be mentioned that physically handicapped candidates would be given preference. Though, in fact, one physically handicapped candidate, namely, C.K. Ray, was available, the opposite party was selected ignoring his case.