2022 (12) TMI 960

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ENIOR ADVOCATE FOR  SMT. KRISHMA NEDUNGADI, ADVOCATE) RESPONDENT BY SHRI. CHALLA KODANDARAM, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR  SMT. KRISHMA NEDUNGADI, ADVOCATE) BY SHRI. M.B. NARAGUND, ASG A/W  SHRI. M.N. KUMAR, CGSC) ORDER  Government of India, Ministry of Law and Justice and the applicant before the CAT have filed these writ petitions challenging the orders dated March 20, 2019 passed by the CAT (Central Administrative Tribunal)  in O.A. No.170/00238/2018 and M.A. No.170/00605/2019. 2. For the sake of convenience, parties shall be referred as per their status in the CAT. 3. We have heard Shri. M.B.Nargund, learned Addl. Solicitor General, Shri. Chella Kodandaram, learned Senior Advocate. 4. Brief facts of the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....vacant posts in ITAT. The said order was challenged before the Delhi High Court contending inter alia that their cases would be considered after recruitment rules were amended as suggested by the ACC (Appointment Committee of the Cabinet) . The Delhi High Court rejected the said contention and directed that the three wait-listed candidates be appointed as Members of the ITAT. The order passed by the Delhi High Court was challenged in Civil Appeal No.6567-6569/2010. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India allowed the said appeals and set-aside the order passed by the CAT and Delhi High Court.  7. The applicant found that without amending the Rules, appointments were being made to the post of Member, ITAT. He filed a writ petition....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t worked. 9. Shri. M.B. Naragund, learned Additional Solicitor General submitted that: * the CAT failed to notice that applicant was not in the Select List of 22.09.2005, but he was in the wait-list; * the applicant was appointed as Accountant Member on March 13, 2015. As per Sub-Rule (1) of Rule 10 of the Recruitment Rules, applicant has no right to claim refixation of seniority and consequential benefits from August 31, 2007, on which day, the ACC approved the appointment of 16 candidates in the Select List. 10. In substance, the learned ASG has argued that applicant was appointed in 2015 and therefore, he is not entitled for the seniority and other benefits from the date of approval of the Select List. 11. Shri....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ive portion of the order of the Apex Court reads as follows: "We, therefore, allow this writ petition and direct consideration of the case of the petitioner for appointment on the basis of his position in the Waiting List against one of the two vacancies that had arisen on account of two of the candidates in the merit list not having been granted the vigilance clearance. This will be done by the concerned Authority within 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The writ petition shall stand disposed of in the above terms." (Emphasis Supplied) 14. Thus, it is clear that the direction by the Apex Court is for consideration of applicant's case for appointment on the basis of his position in the wait-li....