Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, Delhi: An original application was filed by the applicant compelled by the absence of communication regarding the outcome of the selection process for the post of Primary Teacher (Music) despite an active participation, whereas other candidates received offers of appointment while keeping her in the dark about the status. R N Singh (Member), J., and Sanjeeva Kumar (Member) A., directed appointment of the last 17 candidates i.e. the number proportionate to the number of applicants to the post of Primary Teacher (Music), subject to final outcome of the OA, till the next date of hearing.
The case revolved around a selection process for the post of Primary Teacher (Music), initiated by a public notice issued by the respondents. The applicant participated in this selection process, demonstrating the qualifications and abilities, with the expectation of securing employment. Despite the participation, no result or offer of appointment was received. Consequently, feeling aggrieved by the lack of communication regarding their status, the applicant approached the Tribunal seeking redressal.
Counsel for the applicants argued that the applicant approached the Tribunal due to the participation in the selection process and subsequent lack of communication regarding the results. He stressed the need for clarity and fairness in the selection process, asserting that there are others similarly placed and deserving of consideration for the post of Primary Teacher (Music). On the other hand, counsel for the respondent contended that the application was not maintainable as it lacked a cause of action. He argued that the applicant had not made any formal representation seeking redressal of the grievances before resorting to legal action. Despite this, the right to file a reply to the application was reserved.
The Tribunal noted the applicants’ valid concerns regarding the lack of communication and transparency in the selection process. The Tribunal acknowledged the importance of addressing these concerns to uphold the principles of fairness and equal opportunity in public recruitment processes. In response to the respondents’ argument regarding the maintainability of the application, the Tribunal observed that a cause of action would arise when applicants seek redressal of their grievances and are either ignored or arbitrarily dismissed by the respondents. However, it did not preclude the respondents from filing a reply to the application.
Thus, the Tribunal held that interim relief was warranted to prevent potential deprivation of benefits to the applicants pending the final outcome of the original application. It directed that the appointment of the last 17 candidates for the Primary Teacher (Music) post would be subject to the final outcome of the case to ensure that the applicants’ interests were safeguarded until a definitive resolution could be reached.
The Tribunal scheduled the next hearing for 18-04-2024.
[Shikha v KVS, MA No. 767 of 2024, decided on 29-02-2024]
Advocates who appeared in this case :
For Applicant(s) Advocate : Sh. Sahil Mongia with Sh. Shahil Rao, Sh. Abhishek Yadav, Sh. Sharukh Sharma and Sh. Rahul Yadav
For Respondent(s) Advocate : Sh. S. Rajappa
