Seema Kumari Sharma Vs. State of H.P. and Another
EmailAppeal: Civil Appeals Nos. 14531-532 of 1996
(From the Judgment and Order dated 25-4-1996 of the Central Administrative Tribunal at Shimla in O.A. No. 619 of 1995 )
(From the Judgment and Order dated 25-4-1996 of the Central Administrative Tribunal at Shimla in O.A. No. 619 of 1995 )
Petitioner: Seema Kumari Sharma
Respondent: State of H.P. and Another
Apeal: Civil Appeals Nos. 14531-532 of 1996
(From the Judgment and Order dated 25-4-1996 of the Central Administrative Tribunal at Shimla in O.A. No. 619 of 1995 )
(From the Judgment and Order dated 25-4-1996 of the Central Administrative Tribunal at Shimla in O.A. No. 619 of 1995 )
Judges: K.RAMASWAMY AND G.B. PATTRANAIK , JJ.
Date of Judgment: Oct 23, 1996
Appearances:
Ms Rani Chhabra , Advocate , for the Appellant ;
Mr. T.A. Khan and Mr. T. Sridharan , Advocates , for the Respond-ents.
Head Note:
SERVICE AND LABOUR LAW
Constitution – Article 226 , 136 – Appointment – Junior basic Teachers ‘ training – Selection for – 10 marks reserved for IRDP families – Claim disallowed as certificate no produced – Same produced before supreme Court – Certificate carrying serial number of IRDP family . Held that this does not entitle her for award of 10 marks . Directions issued to declare her result and consider her appointment , if selected . (Para 3 ,4)
JUDGEMENT:
ORDER
1 . Leave granted .
2 . We have heard learned counsel on both sides .
3 . These appeals by special leave arise from the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal , Shimla Bench made in OA No. 619 of 1995 and the review order . The admitted position is that the Director of Education issued a notice for Junior Basic Teachers ‘ Training . The criteria for selection was 1 00 marks based on the percentage of marks obtained in matric or equivalent examina-tions. 20 marks for candidates belonging to rural areas and 10 marks for candidates belonging to backward panchayat were allot-ted . Similarly , 10 marks were allotted for candidates belonging to IRDP families . Though the appellant claimed to belong to IRDP family , the authorities have not considered her claim and conse-quently did not award 10 marks as required under the criteria . When the appellant filed the writ petition , the High Court dis-missed the same holding that the appellant had not produced the certificate along with the application and , therefore , she is not entitled to the above status . When we directed the appellant to produce the record , she made the certificate a part of the record . Unfortunately , it does not bear the date of issue but we find that she has been given serial number of the IRDP family . In view of the fact that serial numbers are ascribed to all the candidates in the order , we are of the view that her failure to furnish the certificate along with the application does not disentitle her to claim the status for consideration of award of 10 marks . Pursuant to the interim direction granted by this Court , the appellant has already appeared for the examinations conducted but her result has not been announced .
4 . Therefore , the appeals are allowed ; the order of the Trib-unal stands set aside . There shall be a direction to declare the result and her case for appointment will be considered in accor-dance with the rules , if she is selected . No costs .
1 . Leave granted .
2 . We have heard learned counsel on both sides .
3 . These appeals by special leave arise from the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal , Shimla Bench made in OA No. 619 of 1995 and the review order . The admitted position is that the Director of Education issued a notice for Junior Basic Teachers ‘ Training . The criteria for selection was 1 00 marks based on the percentage of marks obtained in matric or equivalent examina-tions. 20 marks for candidates belonging to rural areas and 10 marks for candidates belonging to backward panchayat were allot-ted . Similarly , 10 marks were allotted for candidates belonging to IRDP families . Though the appellant claimed to belong to IRDP family , the authorities have not considered her claim and conse-quently did not award 10 marks as required under the criteria . When the appellant filed the writ petition , the High Court dis-missed the same holding that the appellant had not produced the certificate along with the application and , therefore , she is not entitled to the above status . When we directed the appellant to produce the record , she made the certificate a part of the record . Unfortunately , it does not bear the date of issue but we find that she has been given serial number of the IRDP family . In view of the fact that serial numbers are ascribed to all the candidates in the order , we are of the view that her failure to furnish the certificate along with the application does not disentitle her to claim the status for consideration of award of 10 marks . Pursuant to the interim direction granted by this Court , the appellant has already appeared for the examinations conducted but her result has not been announced .
4 . Therefore , the appeals are allowed ; the order of the Trib-unal stands set aside . There shall be a direction to declare the result and her case for appointment will be considered in accor-dance with the rules , if she is selected . No costs .
