Bombay High Court
Anand Tukaram Babhare S/O Tukaram ... vs Union Of India Thr. Secretary, ... on 31 August, 2021
Bench: S.B. Shukre, Anil S. Kilor
6-wp-3194-21(j).odt 1/16
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO. 3194 OF 2021
1. Shri Anand Tukaram Babhare,
Aged about 34 years,
S/o. Shri Tukaram Babhare,
Asst. Geologist, GSI, Central Region,
GSI Complex, Seminary Hills,
Nagpur, 440 006.
Mobile: 9665274715; Email ID: [email protected]
2. Shri Abhijeet Renukadas Dixit,
Aged about 38 years,
S/o. Shri Renukadas Dixit,
Asst. Geologist, GSI, Central Region,
GSI Complex, Seminary Hills,
Nagpur, 440 006.
Mobile: 9860810606;
Email ID: [email protected]
..... PETITIONERS
// VERSUS //
1. The Union of India through the Secretary,
Ministry of Mines, Government of India,
3rd Floor, 'A' Wing, Shastri Bhawan,
New Delhi- 110001.
2. The Director General, Geological Survey of India,
27, J. L. Nehru Road,
Kolkata 700016.
3. The Additional Director General and HoD,
GSI, Central Region, Seminary Hills,
Nagpur 440006.
::: Uploaded on - 03/09/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 10/10/2021 05:25:48 :::
6-wp-3194-21(j).odt 2/16
Dr./S/Shri/Smt/Miss (Private Respondents)
4. Prafulla Deorao Vairagade,
Aged about 28 years,
Geologist, Geological Survey of India,
SU: Jharkhand, Eastern Region,
368-A and 451-A, Gate No. 4,
Ashok Nagar, Ranchi 834002.
([email protected])
5. Monomita Chakraborty,
Aged about 28 years,
Geologist, Geological Survey of India,
SU: Rajasthan, Western Region,
Khanji Bhawan, GSI Complex,
15-16, Jhalana Dungri, Jaipur 302004.
([email protected])
6. Davinder Singh,
Aged about 29 years,
Geologist, Geological Survey of India,
SU: Rajasthan, Western Region,
Khanij Bhawan, GSI Complex,
15-16 Jhalana Dungri, Jaipur 302004.
([email protected])
7. Sonam,
Aged about 30 years,
Geologist, SU: Jharkhand,
Geological Survey of India,
SU: Jharkhand, Eastern Region,
368-A and 451-A, Gate No. 4,
Ashok Nagar, Ranchi 834002.
([email protected])
8. Ratnakar Swain,
Aged about 26 years,
Geologist, Geological Survey of India,
SU: Rajasthan, Western Region,
Khanij Bhawan, GSI Complex,
15-16 Jhalana Dungri, Jaipur 302004.
([email protected])
6-wp-3194-21(j).odt 3/16
9. Riddhima Mishra,
Aged about 27 years,
Geologist, Geological Survey of India
SU: Jharkhand, Eastern Region,
368-A and 451-A, Gate No. 4,
Ashok Nagar, Ranchi 834002.
([email protected])
10. Triparna Ghosh,
Aged about 30 years,
Geologist, Geological Survey of India,
Western Region,
Khanij Bhawan, GSI Complex,
15-16 Jhalana Dungri, Jaipur 302004.
([email protected])
11. SnigdhaSairindhri Swain,
Aged about 27 years,
Geologist, Geological Survey of India,
SU: Rajasthan, Western Region,
Khanij Bhawan, GSI Complex,
15-16 Jhalana Dungri, Jaipur 302004.
([email protected])
12. Debasmita Maharana,
Aged about 26 years,
Geologist, Geological Survey of India,
SU: Rajasthan, Western Region,
Khanij Bhawan, GSI Complex,
15-16 Jhalana Dungri, Jaipur 302004.
([email protected])
13. Tamanya Roy,
Aged about 28 years,
Geologist, Geological Survey of India,
SU: Rajasthan, Western Region,
Khanij Bhawan, GSI Complex,
15-16 Jhalana Dungri, Jaipur 302004.
([email protected])
14. Sampriti Mukherjee,
Aged about 26 years,
Geologist, Geological Survey of India,
SU: Rajasthan, Western Region,
6-wp-3194-21(j).odt 4/16
Khanij Bhawan, GSI Complex,
15-16 Jhalana Dungri, Jaipur 302004.
([email protected])
15. Pritha Seth,
Aged about 29 years,
Geologist, Geological Survey of India,
SU: Rajasthan, Western Region,
Khanij Bhawan, GSI Complex,
15-16 Jhalana Dungri, Jaipur 302004.
([email protected])
16. Shubhangi Baranwal,
Aged about 26 years,
Geologist, Geological Survey of India,
SU: Telangana, Southern Region,
GSI Complex, Bandalapuda,
Hydrabad 500068
([email protected])
17. Navneet Kaur,
Aged about 28 years,
Geologist, Geological Survey of India
SU: Jharkhand, Eastern Region,
368-A and 451-A, Gate No. 4,
Ashok Nagar, Ranchi 834002.
([email protected])
18. Subhradip Saha,
Aged about 29 years,
Geologist, Geological Survey of India,
SU: Telangana, Southern Region,
GSI Complex, Bandalapuda,
Hydrabad 500068
([email protected])
19. Prabhas Kumar Mohanty,
Aged about 26 years,
Geologist, Geological Survey of India,
SU: Telangana, Southern Region,
GSI Complex, Bandalapuda,
Hydrabad 500068
([email protected])
6-wp-3194-21(j).odt 5/16
20. Spardha Rai,
Aged about 30 years,
Geologist, Geological Survey of India,
SU: Telangana, Southern Region,
GSI Complex, Bandalapuda,
Hydrabad 500068
([email protected])
21. Nupur Rajkhowa,
Aged about 27 years,
Geologist, Geological Survey of India
SU: Jharkhand, Eastern Region,
368-A and 451-A, Gate No. 4,
Ashok Nagar, Ranchi 834002.
([email protected])
22. Saurabh Pal,
Aged about 28 years,
Geologist, Geological Survey of India
SU: Jharkhand, Eastern Region,
368-A and 451-A, Gate No. 4,
Ashok Nagar, Ranchi 834002.
([email protected])
23. Gaorav Baruah,
Aged about 27 years,
Geologist, Geological Survey of India
SU: Odisha, Eastern Region,
Unit No. VII, Nayapalli,
Bhubaneshwar 751012
([email protected])
24. Tanmoy Saha,
Aged about 28 years,
Geologist, Geological Survey of India
SU: Uttarkhand, Northern Region,
Industrial Area, Near Urja Park,
Patel Nagar,
Dehradun 248001
([email protected])
6-wp-3194-21(j).odt 6/16
25. M Suhail Saleem,
Aged about 28 years,
Geologist, Geological Survey of India
SU: Jharkhand, Eastern Region,
368-A and 451-A, Gate No. 4,
Ashok Nagar, Ranchi 834002.
([email protected])
26. Weneikhro Krome,
Aged about 26 years,
Geologist, Geological Survey of India
SU: Punjab, Haryana & Himachal Pradesh,
Northern Region, Plot No. 3,
Dakshin Marg, Sector 33B,
Sector 33, Chandigarh 160020
([email protected])
27. Wangshitula Qzukum,
Aged about 27 years,
Geologist, Geological Survey of India
SU: Punjab, Haryana & Himachal Pradesh,
Northern Region, Plot No. 3,
Dakshin Marg, Sector 33B,
Sector 33, Chandigarh 160020
([email protected])
28. Ashish Kumar,
Aged about 24 years,
Geologist, Geological Survey of India
SU: Tamil Nadu and Puducherry,
Southern Region, GSI Building,
Inner Road, Guindy Industrial Estate,
Chennai 600032
([email protected])
29. Ashu Pandey,
Aged about 28 years,
Geologist, Geological Survey of India
SU: Uttar Pradesh,
Northern Region,
Vasundhara, Chandralok,
Sector E, Aliganj,
Lucknow 226025
([email protected])
6-wp-3194-21(j).odt 7/16
30. Saurabh Shirish Pawar,
Aged about 29 years,
Geologist, Geological Survey of India
SU: Karnataka & Goa,
Southern Region, Vasudha Bhavan,
Kumarswamy Layout,
Bangaluru 560111
([email protected])
31. Sourav Datta,
Aged about 27 years,
Geologist, Geological Survey of India
SU: Tripura & Mizoram,
North-Eastern Region,
Chandmari 79 Tilla,
Agartala 799006
([email protected])
32. Nilesh Singh,
Aged about 29 years,
Geologist, Geological Survey of India
SU: Karnataka & Goa,
Southern Region, Vasudha Bhavan,
Kumarswamy Layout,
Bangaluru 560111
([email protected])
33. Abhishek Srivastava,
Aged about 32 years,
Geologist, Geological Survey of India,
SU: Andhara Pradesh, Southern Region,
GSI Complex, Bandalapuda,
Hydrabad 500068
([email protected])
34. Sreejata Sarkar,
Aged about 26 years,
Geologist, Geological Survey of India,
SU: Maharashtra, Central Region,
GSI Complex, Seminary Hills,
Nagpur 440006
([email protected])
6-wp-3194-21(j).odt 8/16
35. Ankita,
Aged about 28 years,
Geologist, Geological Survey of India
SU: Tamil Nadu and Puducherry,
Southern Region, GSI Building,
Inner Road, Guindy Industrial Estate,
Chennai 600032
([email protected])
36. Debashish Jana,
Aged about 30 years,
Geologist, Geological Survey of India
SU: Uttar Pradesh, Northern Region,
Vasundhara, Chandralok,
Sector E, Aliganj,
Lucknow 226025
([email protected])
37. Debosmita Roy,
Aged about 27 years,
Geologist, Geological Survey of India
SU: Madhya Pradesh, Central Region,
Sanjeevani Nagar, Jabalpur 482003
([email protected])
38. Achintamay Mazumder,
Aged about 27 years,
Geologist, Geological Survey of India,
SU: Andhara Pradesh, Southern Region,
GSI Complex, Bandalapuda,
Hydrabad 500068
([email protected])
39. Sasthi Gogoi,
Aged about 27 years,
Geologist, Geological Survey of India,
SU: Andhara Pradesh, Southern Region,
GSI Complex, Bandalapuda,
Hydrabad 500068
([email protected])
6-wp-3194-21(j).odt 9/16
40. Sahana Mandal,
Aged about 28 years,
Geologist, Geological Survey of India,
SU: Andhara Pradesh, Southern Region,
GSI Complex, Bandalapuda,
Hydrabad 500068
([email protected])
41. Arindam Choudhary,
Aged about 26 years,
Geologist, Geological Survey of India
SU: Tripura & Mizoram,
North-Eastern Region,
Chandmari 79 Tilla,
Agartala 799006
([email protected])
42. Sandeep Bhoi,
Aged about 37 years,
Geologist, Geological Survey of India
SU: West Bengal & Anandaman,
Eastern Region, F-42,
Karunamoyee, DK Block,
Bidhannagar, Kolkata,
West Bangal 700091
([email protected])
43. Rahul Suresh Parhad,
Aged about 27 years,
Geologist, Geological Survey of India
SU: Tamil Nadu and Puducherry,
Southern Region, GSI Building,
Inner Road, Guindy Industrial Estate,
Chennai 600032
([email protected])
44. Sanjukta Sen,
Aged about 28 years,
Geologist, Geological Survey of India,
SU: Telangana, Southern Region,
GSI Complex, Bandalapuda,
Hydrabad 500068
([email protected])
6-wp-3194-21(j).odt 10/16
45. Jakeybon Das,
Aged about 29 years,
Geologist, Geological Survey of India
SU: Tamil Nadu and Puducherry,
Southern Region, GSI Building,
Inner Road, Guindy Industrial Estate,
Chennai 600032
([email protected])
46. Abinash Sahu,
Aged about 28 years,
Geologist, Geological Survey of India
SU: Chhattisgarh, Central Region,
Pujari Complex, 3rd Floor,
Raipur-Abhanur Road, Dharam Nagar,
Pachpedi Naka, Raipur,
Chhattisgarh 492010
([email protected])
47. Ritesh Ranjan,
Aged about 27 years,
Geologist, Geological Survey of India
SU: Tamil Nadu and Puducherry,
Southern Region, GSI Building,
Inner Road, Guindy Industrial Estate,
Chennai 600032
([email protected])
48. Sana Dilnasheen,
Aged about 27 years,
Geologist, Geological Survey of India
SU: Madhya Pradesh, Central Region,
Link Rd Number 3, E-5,
Arera Colony, Bhopal 462016
([email protected])
49. Devender Singh,
Aged about 26 years,
Geologist, Geological Survey of India,
SU: Rajasthan, Western Region,
Khanji Bhawan, GSI Complex,
15-16, Jhalana Dungri, Jaipur 302004.
([email protected])
6-wp-3194-21(j).odt 11/16
50. Sambit Kumar Pradhan,
Aged about 26 years,
Geologist, Geological Survey of India
SU: Tamil Nadu and Puducherry,
Southern Region, GSI Building,
Inner Road, Guindy Industrial Estate,
Chennai 600032
([email protected])
51. Kimnunchoi,
Aged about 26 years,
Geologist, Geological Survey of India
SU: Karnataka & Goa,
Southern Region, Vasudha Bhavan,
Kumarswamy Layout,
Bangaluru 560111
([email protected]) .... RESPONDENTS
=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Shri Dr. Anjan K. Chatterjee, Advocate for petitioner.
Mrs. Neerja Chaubey, Advocate for respondent nos.1 to 3.
=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
CORAM : SUNIL B. SHUKRE AND
ANIL S.KILOR, JJ.
DATED : 31st August, 2021.
ORAL JUDGMENT : (Per : Sunil B. Shukre, J.)
Heard Shri Anjan K. Chatterjee, learned counsel
for the petitioners and Mrs. Neerja Chaubey, learned counsel,
who appears by waiving notice for respondent nos. 1 to 3 in
the matter.
2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard
finally by consent of the parties.
6-wp-3194-21(j).odt 12/16
3. The petitioners have questioned the legality and
correctness of the order dated 12th November, 2020 passed by
the Central Administrative Tribunal, Mumbai dismissing the
original application filed by the petitioners on the ground that
the applications seek multiple reliefs, which is not permissible
as per Section 10 of the Central Administrative Tribunal
(Procedure) Rule, 1987.
4. According to the learned counsel for the
petitioners the order is erroneous while, learned counsel for
the respondents has supported the order.
5. Section 10 of the Central Administrative Tribunal
(Procedure) Rule, 1987 reads as under:-
"Section 10. Plural remedies: An application shall
be based upon a single cause of action and may
seek one or more reliefs provided that they are
consequential to one another."
6. It is clear from the above referred provision of
law that any application which is based upon single cause of
action, though it seeks multiple reliefs and even consequential
reliefs, is maintainable. It is also clear that what is prohibited
by this provision is filing of an application based upon
multiple causes of action. In the light of this provision, we
have to see as to whether or not reliefs claimed in the original
6-wp-3194-21(j).odt 13/16
application met the parameters of Section 10 of the Central
Administrative Tribunal (Procedure) Rule, 1987.
7. The prayers made in the original application filed
before the Central Administrative Tribunal, for the sake of
convenience are reproduced as under :
i) Stay the promotion and all consequent action
based on gradation list of Geologist issued by the
Respondent no. 3 (DG, GSI) vide letter no. 85/A-21011/
Geol./2020-Pers.I, dated 12/03/2020 in respect of Sl.
no. 655 to 702 in this gradation list who have been
added as Private Respondent nos. 5 to 52 herein and
who have already joined the GSI.
ii) Stay the appointment process of Private
Respondent nos. 53 to 101 of the UPSC 2019
Geoscientists Examination, who have been selected by
the Respondent no. 2 (Through Secretary, UPSC) and
who are to be appointed as Geologist w.e.f. 19.11.2020
by the Respondent no. 3 (DG, GSI). They are likely to
become senior to the Applicants.
iii) Stay direct recruitment process that is being
carried out through the UPSC Geoscientist Examination
2020 for 79 posts of Geologists under Respondent no. 1
(Secretary, MoM), 2 (Secretary, UPSC) and 3 (DG, GSI)
till the two Applicants are promoted and till their
seniority and residency is fixed retrospectively as per
DoPT guidelines in O.M. No. 2011/1/2012-Estt (D) of
04.03.2014 and legitimately as due with the 2017 UPSC
batch of Direct Recruits, who have already, joined the
GSI.
iv) Grant promotions to the two Applicants w.e.f.
01.04.2017, with notional seniority and residency in the
post of Geologist so that they do not suffer while getting
promoted to the next higher post.
v) Grant all consequential benefits of arrears of pay
and allowances w.e.f. 01.04.2017 till the date they are
6-wp-3194-21(j).odt 14/16
promoted to the post of Geologist to the two Applicants
who have unduly suffered for no fault of theirs.
vi) Pay penal interest @ 12% per annum on the
amount of such arrears of pay and allowances w.e.f.
01.04.2017 till the date of such payment, which the two
Applicants could have used in a meaningful manner in
keeping their families more healthy and happy.
8. A bare perusal of the above referred prayers
would be enough for us to find that the main relief sought in
the original application is based upon the cause of action
arising from the contention of the petitioners that they, having
completed more than two years of service as Assistant
Geologists, have become entitled to be considered
appropriately for their promotion to the post of Geologist.
The petitioners have based their such claim upon the
provision made in Schedule II of the Recruitment Rules for the
post of Geologist. The provisions contained in Schedule II
indicate that the field of promotion would comprise the
officers with two years of regular service in the post of
Assistant Geologist, Grade-I (Group B) Gazette. The
contention of the petitioners here is that they already fulfill
this criteria and therefore they are due for their promotion to
the next post of Geologist, but for some reason or the other,
the meeting of Departmental Promotion Committee ("DPC"
for short) is not being held. This is the reason for which the
6-wp-3194-21(j).odt 15/16
petitioners made a specific prayer, the only main prayer in the
original application, as contained in prayer clause (iv). It may
be that this prayer has not been properly worded but, the fact
remains that this prayer appears to be the only main prayer
made by the petitioner and it appears to be based upon the
cause of action arising from completion of the petitioners
requisite years of service in the post of Assistant Geologist and
non holding of the DPC. The other prayers, as we could see,
prima facie appear to be relating to consequential reliefs and
they are also of interim nature. However, these aspects of the
matter have not been appropriately considered by the CAT
while passing the impugned order and therefore, we are of
the view that such an order cannot be upheld by us.
9. In the result, the petition is allowed. The
impugned order is hereby quashed and set aside. The matter
is remanded back to the Central Administrative Tribunal,
Mumbai for consideration and decision afresh in accordance
with law in the matter.
10. The petitioners are directed to appear before the
Tribunal on 20th September, 2021 personally or through their
counsel.
6-wp-3194-21(j).odt 16/16
11. The petitioners are also granted liberty to file the
application for amendment to the original application and if
such application is filed by the petitioners, the same shall be
decided as expeditiously as possible in accordance with law
by the Tribunal.
12. No order as to costs.
JUDGE JUDGE
sknair
