Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi And Ors vs Mukesh Vats And Ors
2012 Latest Caselaw 3398 Del

       *       IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

%                                        Judgment delivered on 21.05.2012


+      W.P.(C) 3038/2012


       GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS                               ...       Petitioners

                                      Versus

       MUKESH VATS AND ORS                                             ...Respondents


Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner   : Ms. Avnish Ahlawat with Ms. Urvashi Malhotra
For the Respondent   : Ms. Amita Kalkal Chaudhary for Mr. Naresh Kaushik

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.JAIN

                           JUDGMENT

BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J. (ORAL)

Caveat No. 525/2010 in WP(C) No. 3038/2012

The learned counsel for the Caveators/Respondents is present. The Caveat

stands discharged.

WP(C) No. 3038/2012 & CM No. 6556/2012 (u/S 151 CPC for stay)

1. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 3.01.2012 passed by the

Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (hereinafter referred

to as "the Tribunal") in Original Application No. 1618/2011.

2. The respondents had filed the said Original Application as they had sought

age relaxation on the ground that they were sportsmen. They had based their claim

on two Office Memoranda (OMs) being OM dated 4.8.1980 and OM dated

12.11.1987, which, according to them, if read in conjunction with each other would

entitle them to the age relaxation that they were seeking for the Group „B‟ Post of

Teacher (Physical Education) bearing post code No. 18/10 advertised by the Delhi

Subordinate Services Selection Board (DSSSB), through their advertisement No.

1/10 dated 22.2.2010. The Tribunal after considering the arguments raised on both

sides allowed the Original Application with the direction to the respondents therein

(the petitioners herein) to grant the benefits of age relaxation in the upper age limit

as per OM dated 12.11.1987 to the applicants (respondents herein). It was also

indicated that if they were otherwise found fit and eligible, they shall be given

appointment as Physical Education Teachers in the Directorate of Education within

a period of 02 months from the date of receipt of a copy of the said order. The

Tribunal also directed that the applicants would be entitled to consequential

benefits except back wages.

3. Since the respondents had rested their case on the two OMs, it would be

necessary to point out that insofar as the first OM i.e., OM dated 4.8.1980 is

concerned, that clearly applied only to Group „C‟ and Group „D‟ posts. However,

the OM dated 12.11.1987, in our view, applies to all groups of Civil Posts/Services

except those which are filled through competitive examinations conducted by the

UPSC. The reason for this will become clear shortly.

4. The said OM dated 12.11.1987 is as under:

"Sub: Relaxation of upper age limit for meritorious sportsmen/sportswomen for appointment in the Central Government ***** The undersigned is directed to say that orders were issued for appointment of meritorious sportsmen/sportswomen in Group „C‟ and „D‟ posts in relaxation of the recruitment procedure vide this Department‟s OM Nos. 14015/1/76-Estt.(D) dated 4th August, 1980 and 14034/7/85-Estt.(D) dated 18th September, 1985 (copies enclosed). The question of giving further concessions to this category has been engaging the attention of the Government for some time past. In particular, a proposal to extend the concessions of age relaxation for entry of the sportspersons into Government Service has been under consideration.

2. The matter has been carefully considered in consultation with the UPSC, the Ministry of Law and the Department of Youth Affairs and Sports. It has now been decided that the categories of sportsmen/sportswomen specified in para (a) of this Departments OM dated 4.8.1980 may be allowed relaxation in upper age limit upto a maximum of 5 years (10 years in the case of those belonging to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes) for the purpose of appointment to all Groups of Civil posts/services under the Government of India filled otherwise than through competitive examinations conducted by the UPSC. This concession will be available only to those sportspersons who satisfy all other eligibility conditions relating to educational qualifications etc. and furnish a certificate in the form and from an

authority prescribed in the OM dated 6th August, 1980. Sub-para (b) of paragraph 1 of this OM would be deemed to have been amended to this extent."

(Underlining added)

5. A plain reading of the said OM indicates that the subject with which it was

concerned was relaxation of upper age limit of meritorious sportsmen/sportswomen

for appointment in the Central Government. It clearly indicates that earlier the OM

dated 4.8.1980 dealt with the question of relaxation of the age limit insofar as

Group „C‟ and Group „D‟ posts were concerned. However, the question of giving

further concessions to the category of meritorious sportsmen/sportswomen had

been engaging the attention of the Government for some time. It was in this

context that a proposal had been made to extend the concession of age relaxation

for entry of sportspersons into Government service. In this backdrop, the

Government of India (Department of Personnel and Training) had, in consultation

with the UPSC, the Ministry of Law and Department of Youth Affairs and Sports,

come to a decision that the categories of sportsmen/sportswomen specified in

paragraph „a‟ of the OM dated 4.8.1980 be allowed relaxation in upper age limit

upto a maximum of 05 years (10 years in the case of those belonging to Scheduled

Castes and Scheduled Tribes) for the purpose of appointment to "all groups of Civil

Posts/Services under the Government of India filled otherwise than through the

competitive examination conducted by the UPSC".

6. There is no dispute that this OM is applicable to the petitioners. The only

point urged before the Tribunal on behalf of the petitioners was that the age

relaxation granted in the OM of 12.11.1987 pertained only to Group „C‟ and Group

„D‟ posts and not to the Group „B‟ posts to which the respondents herein were

seeking appointment. The Tribunal repelled the contention of the petitioners.

7. We have also examined the two OMs viz., OM dated 4.8.1980 and

12.11.1987 and are clear that while the first OM dated 4.8.1980 pertained to age

relaxation in respect of meritorious sportspersons for Group ‟C‟ and Group „D‟

posts, the second OM dated 12.11.1987 extended that age relaxation to all groups

of Civil Posts/Services under the Government of India filled otherwise than

through the competitive examinations conducted by the UPSC. Since the

Government of NCT of Delhi has adopted the said OMs, the interpretation that is to

be given would be that the same age relaxation is to be given for the purpose of

appointment to all groups of civil posts/services under the Government of NCT of

Delhi filled otherwise than through the examinations conducted by the UPSC. This

being the case the Tribunal cannot be faulted for arriving at the conclusion that it

did. The respondents are clearly covered by the said OMs read in the manner

indicated above.

8. Consequently, no interference is called for insofar as the impugned order

passed by the Tribunal is concerned except to the extent that we extend the period

for implementation of the order by a further 06 weeks. We make it clear that those

of the respondents, who are appointed pursuant to the directions given by the

Tribunal, as upheld by this Court, would not be entitled to any seniority or back

wages prior to the date of the joining.

With these directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. There shall be no

order as to costs.

BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J

V.K.JAIN, J MAY 21, 2012 vn