POONAM GOEL Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner impugns the order dated 19.10.2012, passed by Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh, whereby, her Original Application in which she raised the question of eligibility/suitability of sixth respondent for appointment to the post of Professor in Obstetrics and Gynecology, has been dismissed and another Original Application filed by sixth respondent for quashing of the very initiation of disciplinary proceedings, has been allowed.

(2.) THE petitioner as well as sixth respondent both are senior faculty members in the Government Medical College and Hospital, Sector 32, Chandigarh and both are working in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology. There existed a post of Professor in the Department which was decided to be filled in by promotion, for which the case of the petitioner and sixth respondent was forwarded to the Union Public Service Commission (in short 'Commission'). The Commission recommended respondent No.6 for promotion but further action was withheld as the Commission also recommended to take disciplinary action against her. Since the claim of petitioner stood impliedly rejected by Commission, she approached the Tribunal questioning the very eligibility and suitability of sixth respondent for promotion to the post of Professor as well as the denial of fair consideration to her.

(3.) THE Tribunal has passed a composite order deciding both the Original Applications, namely, filed by the petitioner as well as respondent No.6. In para 11 of the impugned order, the Tribunal has taken notice of the contention raised on behalf of the petitioner that respondent No.6 does not possess "the rule related eligibility for appointment as Professor." In para 13, the Tribunal has again observed as follows: -