Jharkhand High Court
Purna Chandra Kahili vs Union Of India & Others Through The ... on 12 April, 2021
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P. (C) No. 1572 of 2021
------
Purna Chandra Kahili, aged about 51 years, S/o Late
Rasaraj Kahili, R/o Flat No. 608, Brijnandan Residency,
Opp. Gandhi Maidan, Matwari, P.O., P.S. - Korha & District
- Hazaribagh. ..... Petitioner
Versus
1.Union of India & Others through the Secretary, Ministry
of Road, Transport and Highways, 1, Parliament Street,
Transport Bhawan, New Delhi, P.O., P.S. & District - New
Delhi.
2.The National Highway Authority of India, through its
Chairman, at Plot No. G-5 & 6 Dwarka - Sector 10, New
Delhi - 110075, P.O., P.S. & District - New Delhi.
3.The General Manager (HR/Admin) - II A, National
Highway Authority of India, at Plot No. G-5 & 6 Dwarka -
Sector 10, New Delhi - 110075, P.O., P.S. & District - New
Delhi. .... ...Respondents
----
CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD
-----
For the Appellants : Mr. Aditya Shankar, Advocate
Mr. Shristi Sinha, Avocate
For the Respondents : Mr. Amrit Raj Kisku, Advocate
-------
Oral Judgment
Order No. 02 : Dated 12th April, 2021:
Matter has been heard through video conferencing
and there is no complaint whatsoever regarding audio
and/or visual quality.
2. This case is listed under the heading for 'Orders (with
defect)'. Defects ignored.
3. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
4. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the
defects, pointed out by the office, are ignored.
5. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties,
the matter is being heard and disposed of at this stage
itself.
6. This writ petition, filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India, is directed against the order dated
25.03.2021 passed in O.A. No. 238 of 2021 by learned
Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna (Circuit Bench,
Ranchi), whereby and whereunder according to writ
petitioner grant of ad interim ex-parte stay, over order dated
01.03.2021 by which the writ petitioner was reverted back
to the post of Technical Assistant, has been refused; further
for quashing of order dated 01.03.2021 by which the
petitioner has been reverted back to the post of Technical
Assistant; and for quashing transfer order dated
18.02.2021; as also for direction upon the respondents to
restore the petitioner on his earlier post, on which, the writ
petitioner was working.
7. The case of the writ petitioner, as per the pleadings
made in the Original Application, as has been appended as
Annexure 1 to the writ petition, reads hereunder as:
The writ petitioner has joined the services of the
respondents on 25.06.1997 on the post of Technical
Assistant and while working as such, he acquired four
years Diploma in Civil Engineering in the year 2007.
In November, 2011, the respondents-National
Highway Authority of India (in short 'NHAI') published
vacancy for appointment of hundred numbers of Manager
(Tech) on deputation basis. The writ petitioner applied for
the said post but his application was rejected on the sole
ground that senior level experience is less than three years.
Being aggrieved thereof, the petitioner approached
before the Central Administrative Tribunal, New Delhi by
filing O.A. No. 299 of 2012, which was disposed of vide
order dated 11.12.2012 directing the respondents to
consider the eligibility of the applicant for the post of
Manager (Technical) keeping in view his experience.
It is the case of the writ petitioner that even after the
aforesaid order, his application was not considered in right
prospective and the same was rejected by the respondents-
authorities.
Being aggrieved, the writ petitioner again approached
before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench,
New Delhi by filing O.A. No. 1275 of 2014, which was
disposed of vide order dated 30.10.2014 directing the
respondents to re-consider the case of the applicant for
promotion to the post of Manager (Technical) by holding a
review Selection Commission.
In compliance thereof, the writ petitioner was
promoted to the post of Manager (Tech) w.e.f 18.05.2012.
Thereafter, the writ petitioner was promoted to the post of
Dy. General Manager (Tech) w.e.f. 18.05.2016 vide order
dated 27.10.2017.
The respondents-NHAI, in compliance of judgment
passed by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Orissa Lift
Irrigation Corp. Ltd & Ors Vs. Rabi Shankar Patro &
Ors directed the writ petitioner to submit his certificate of
degree. Pursuant thereto, the writ petitioner submitted
detailed representation on 01.05.2019 mentioning therein
to consider his candidature for promotion on the basis of
experience, as per Rule laid down in Recruitment Rules,
and not on the basis of his B. Tech Degree and further
stated therein that the above-referred judgment of Hon'ble
Apex Court is not applicable in his case.
The respondents-authority, in the meantime,
transferred the writ petitioner from PIU-Hazaribagh to
NHAI, HQ vide order dated 18.02.2021 in utter violation of
the circular issued by the Project Director.
Thereafter, the writ petitioner, vide order dated
01.03.2021 was reverted to the post of Technical Assistant
(without recovery of any monetary advantage earned till
date).
Being aggrieved with the order of transfer and order
of reversal to the post of Technical Assistant, the writ
petitioner approached the Central Administrative Tribunal,
Patna (Circuit Bench Ranchi) by filing O.A. No. 238 of 2021.
8. Before the Tribunal, the case was taken up on
25.03.2021 and notice was issued upon the respondents,
which has been waived by Mr. Rabindra Rai, learned
counsel appearing for the respondents-NHAI, who was
directed to file Written Statement.
On the aforesaid date, prayer for interim relief has
also been sought for, as such respondents were directed to
ensure filing of written statement before next date of
hearing, failing which prayer for interim relief was ordered
to be heard on the next date of hearing i.e. on 22.04.2021,
in absence of written statement.
The aforesaid order dated 25.03.2021 has been
assailed in this writ petition. It appears from the prayer
made in the instant writ petition, treating the order dated
25.03.2021 to be rejection of prayer for interim relief made
by the writ petitioner, to quash order dated 25.03.2021.
However, we find from impugned order dated 25.03.2021
passed in O.A. No. 238 of 2021 that the Central
Administrative Tribunal has not refused to grant ad interim
stay vide order 25.03.2021 rather the learned counsel for
the respondents has been directed to ensure filing of written
statement and so far ad interim stay is concerned it is to be
considered on the next date of hearing and accordingly, the
matter has been posted on 22.04.2021.
9. Accordingly, there is no requirement of our
interference for the present.
10. However, the writ petition is disposed of requesting
the Tribunal to decide the prayer for ad interim relief
preferably on the date fixed, in accordance with law.
(Dr. Ravi Ranjan, C.J.)
(Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.)
Alankar/ -
N.A.F.R.
