Petitioners challenged a Tribunal order granting seniority from date of appointment to a respondent who joined nearly 10 months late. The Court examined guidelines reserving clauses for late joiners, delays in filing objections, and non-impleadment of competitors.
Impugned order of the Tribunal set aside and original petition for seniority rejected.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
OP(CAT).52/15
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN
FRIDAY, THE 06TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2019 / 15TH AGRAHAYANA, 1941
OP (CAT).No.52 OF 2015(Z)
PETITIONER/S:
1 UNION OF INDIA AGED 58 YEARS REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, YOUTH AFFAIRS AND SPORTS SASTHRI BHAVAN, NEW DELHI.
2 DIRECTOR GENERAL NEHRU YUVA KENDRA SANGATHAN, SCOPE MINOR, LAKSHMI NAGAR DISTRICT CENTRE, DELHI-110 092.
4 ZONAL DIRECTOR NEHRU YUVA KENDRA SANGATHA, TRIVANDRUM.
BY ADV. SRI.T.V.VINU, CGC
RESPONDENT/S:
JAIN GEORGE
DISTRICT YOUTH CO-ORDINATOR, NEHRU YUVA KENDRA, TRICHUR, KERALA.
R1 BY ADV. SRI.SIBY J.MONIPPALLY
THIS OP (CAT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06.12.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
OP(CAT).52/15
2
K.VINOD CHANDRAN
&
V.G.ARUN, JJ.
O.P (CAT).No. 52 of 2015
Dated this the 6th day of December, 2019
JUDGMENT
Vinod Chandran, J.
Petitioners are the Union of India and its officers, who challenge the order of the Tribunal which conferred the applicant seniority from the date of his appointment order, i.e. 2.2.1989 when he actually joined duty on 4.12.1989.
OP(CAT).52/15
3
“(c) Direct recruits have been allowed a maximum period of six months for their joining after the appointment. Who have joined after six months, they have been considered junior to those who have (been) joined up to that date, as per rules.”
4
OP(CAT).52/15
5
OP(CAT).52/15
constituted and there was a specific mandate to consider representations up to 28.2.2009, the applicant did not file a representation before that date. The representation filed by him was far later on 16.5.2009, which was rejected upon which deeming a cause of action the issue was considered by the Tribunal. We notice that none of the persons who would have enjoyed seniority to the applicant have been impleaded at least in a representative capacity before the Tribunal.
In the above circumstances, we do not think that the order of the Tribunal can be sustained on merits. The applicants claim for seniority further fail on grounds of having slept over his rights as also nonimpleadment of affected parties. We set aside the impugned order and allow the original petition rejecting the O.A.
Sd/-
K.VINOD CHANDRAN
JUDGE
Sd/-
V.G.ARUN JUDGE
vgsx
OP(CAT).52/15
6
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
| ANNEXURE A1 | A PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER 02.02.1989 AS DISTRICT YOUTH COORDINATOR |
|---|---|
| ANNEXURE A2 | A PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE LETTER SUBMITTED TO THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM DATED 08.02.1989 |
| ANNEXURE A3 | A PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 15.02.1989 |
| ANNEXURE A4 | A PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 16.05.2009 SUBMITTED TO THE DIRECTOR GENERAL |
| ANNEXURE A5 | A PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE SENIORITY LIST I ALONG WITH THE COVERING LETTER |
| ANNEXURE A6 | A PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 10.12.2010 TO THE DIRECTOR GENERAL HIGHLIGHTING HIS GRIEVANCE TO THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY |
| ANNEXURE A7 | PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 19.04.2012 |
| ANNEXURE A8 | A PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 07.06.2013 ISSUED BY DEPUTY DIRECTOR NEHRU YUVA KENDRA DELHI (RESPONDENT NO.4) |
| EXHIBIT P1 | TRUE COPY OF THE O.A.NO.180/00061/2014 DATED 01.10.2014 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT BEFORE THE CAT, ERNAKULAM |
| EXHIBIT P2 | TRUE COPY OF REPLY STATEMENT FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE CAT, ERNAKULAM |
| EXHIBIT P3 | TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN O.A.NO.180/00061/2014 DATED 01.10.2014 OF THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM |
3 issues framed by the court
Whether a direct recruit permitted to join after the maximum six-month period under guidelines can claim seniority from the date of appointment order.
Whether the claimant can seek seniority from the date of appointment when he slept over his rights by failing to object when draft seniority lists were published.
Whether the relief can be granted when affected parties who would have enjoyed higher seniority were not impleaded before the Tribunal.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Union of India
Jain George
Vinod Chandran
V. G. Arun
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
