M. Selvanathan & Anr. etc. Vs. The Registrar, Central Administrative Tribunal, Chennai & Ors. etc.
EmailAppeal: Civil Appeal Nos. 1381-82 of 2004
And Civil Appeal No. 1383 of 2004
(From the Judgment and Order dated 29.1.2002 of the Madras High Court in W.P. Nos. 8279 and 8280 of 1998).
And Civil Appeal No. 1383 of 2004
(From the Judgment and Order dated 29.1.2002 of the Madras High Court in W.P. Nos. 8279 and 8280 of 1998).
Petitioner: M. Selvanathan & Anr. etc.
Respondent: The Registrar, Central Administrative Tribunal, Chennai & Ors. etc.
Apeal: Civil Appeal Nos. 1381-82 of 2004
And Civil Appeal No. 1383 of 2004
(From the Judgment and Order dated 29.1.2002 of the Madras High Court in W.P. Nos. 8279 and 8280 of 1998).
And Civil Appeal No. 1383 of 2004
(From the Judgment and Order dated 29.1.2002 of the Madras High Court in W.P. Nos. 8279 and 8280 of 1998).
Judges: R.C. LAHOTI, CJI, K.G. BALAKRISHNAN & G.P.MATHUR, JJ.
Date of Judgment: Feb 11, 2005
Appearances:
Mr. V. Prabhakar, Mr. C.U. Sunanithni, Mr. R.S. Krishan Kumar, Mr. M.K.D. Namboodiri, Advocates for the Appellant in C.A. Nos. 1381-82/2004.
Mr. S. Gurukrishna Kumar, Ms. Srikala G.K., and Mr. S.R. Setia, Advocates for the Appellant in C.A. No. 1383/2004.
Mr. M.N. Rao, Mr. V.R. Reddy, Mr. R. Venkataramani, Mr. T.S. Doabia, Senior Advocates, Mr. M.A. Chinnaswamy, Mr. V.G. Pragasam, Mr. V. Balachandran, Mr. Naveen R. Nath, Ms. Lalit Mohini Bhat, Ms. Hetu Arora, Ms. Anitha Shenoy, Mr. Ashok Panigrahi, Mr. V.K. Verma, Mr. S.N. Terdal, Ms. Sunita Sharma, Advocates with them for the Respondents.
Mr. S. Gurukrishna Kumar, Ms. Srikala G.K., and Mr. S.R. Setia, Advocates for the Appellant in C.A. No. 1383/2004.
Mr. M.N. Rao, Mr. V.R. Reddy, Mr. R. Venkataramani, Mr. T.S. Doabia, Senior Advocates, Mr. M.A. Chinnaswamy, Mr. V.G. Pragasam, Mr. V. Balachandran, Mr. Naveen R. Nath, Ms. Lalit Mohini Bhat, Ms. Hetu Arora, Ms. Anitha Shenoy, Mr. Ashok Panigrahi, Mr. V.K. Verma, Mr. S.N. Terdal, Ms. Sunita Sharma, Advocates with them for the Respondents.
Head Note:
CONSTITUTION/SERVICE LAWS
Government Services – Appointment – Reservation of SC/ST. Held migrant SC/ST eligible for appointment against posts reserved for SC/ST candidates – There is no constitutional or other legal violation in such selection and appointment. (For detailed reasons see S. Pushpa and Others v. Sivachanmugavelu and Others JT 2005 (2) SC 137).
Government Services – Appointment – Reservation of SC/ST. Held migrant SC/ST eligible for appointment against posts reserved for SC/ST candidates – There is no constitutional or other legal violation in such selection and appointment. (For detailed reasons see S. Pushpa and Others v. Sivachanmugavelu and Others JT 2005 (2) SC 137).
JUDGEMENT:
G. P. MATHUR, J.
1. The issue involved in these appeals is similar to that of Civil Appeal Nos. 6-7 of 1998 and Civil Appeal Nos. 4-5 of 1998. In these cases, the Central Administrative Tribunal had allowed the O.A. filed by some of the respondents following its earlier judgment and order dated 5.11.1996 given in O.A. No. 199/1996 and O.A. No. 214/1996 and the writ petition filed by the appellants challenging the said order was dismissed by the Madras High Court.
2. For the reasons given in Civil Appeal Nos. 6-7 of 1998 etc. these appeals are allowed and the impugned judgment and order of the Central Administrative Tribunal (Madras Bench) is set aside.
1. The issue involved in these appeals is similar to that of Civil Appeal Nos. 6-7 of 1998 and Civil Appeal Nos. 4-5 of 1998. In these cases, the Central Administrative Tribunal had allowed the O.A. filed by some of the respondents following its earlier judgment and order dated 5.11.1996 given in O.A. No. 199/1996 and O.A. No. 214/1996 and the writ petition filed by the appellants challenging the said order was dismissed by the Madras High Court.
2. For the reasons given in Civil Appeal Nos. 6-7 of 1998 etc. these appeals are allowed and the impugned judgment and order of the Central Administrative Tribunal (Madras Bench) is set aside.
