UNION OF INDIA Vs. RADHASHYAM SAHOO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Union of India in this writ application has sought to challenge the order and judgment dated 12.11.1999 passed in O.A. No. 1 of 1999 by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack, whereby, the Tribunal directed quashing the review of selection and appointment of Opp. Party No. 1, as well as, quashing the notice to show cause impugned thereto and directed that if in the meanwhile, the services of the applicant have been terminated, then he shall be re -instated forthwith with all back wages.

(2.) MR . Mishra, Learned Asstt. Solicitor General, on behalf of the Union of India, contended that since the process of selection of Opp. Party No. 1 as EDDA -cum -EDMC of Kanikapara Branch Post Office, in Mangalpur Sub -Post, Office was reviewed and it was found that other candidates who had secured more marks in their matriculation examination had been rejected on the ground of not having provided residential certificates and character certificates. Mr. Mishra, in course of argument, placed reliance upon an earlier judgment of the CAT in O.A. No. 6 of 1999 which was disposed of on 31.5.1999 and submitted that the Tribunal in the said case had rejected the prayer of the applicant therein who was similarly situated as the present Opp. Party and therefore, submitted that the impugned order under Annexure -1 ought to have been similarly dismissed.

(3.) UPON hearing the arguments advanced by the learned Counsel for the parties and on perusal of the writ application, counter affidavit and the connected judgments, we find that in the case of Union of India v. Bikash Kuanar (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court took note of the Division Bench Judgment of this High Court which is quoted herein below: