CourtKutchehry.com
Tribunals and CommissionsDivision Bench

Pawan Kumar Parihar & Others vs Union Of India & Others

Central Administrative Tribunal · Decided on 24 November 2020 · Citation: (2020) 11 CAT CK 0106

HON’BLE JUDGES
L. Narasimha Reddy, J · A.K. Bishnoi, Member (A)
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Original Application No. 375, 376, 387, 431, 435, 438, 440, 633 Of 2020, Miscellaneous Application No. 2410, 2264, 2263, 2267, 2411, 2266, 2265, 2262 Of 2020
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

14 paragraphs · 195 words

L. Narasimha Reddy, J

1.

In this batch of O.As., the applicants are challenging the action of the respondents in not treating the applicants as qualified for the post of Chemical

Assistant in Central Revenues Control Laboratory (CRCL).

2.

We heard Mr.Hardik Ahluwalia and Mr.B.K.Singh, learned counsel for the applicants and Mr.G.S.Virk, Mr.Satish Kumar and Mr. R.K.Sharma,

learned counsel for the respondents.

3.

This very question was dealt with by this Tribunal in Rizwan v. Central Revenue Control Laboratory & others (O.A. No.2738/2019& batch)

decided on 07.10.2020. The relevant rules were interpreted, and the plea raised by the applicants therein was not accepted. The same situation obtains

in the instant O.As. also

2.

The question in some of the O.As.is about the exercise of discretion by Staff Selection Commission (SSC) or the competent authority, as regards

the relaxation of the qualifications or experience. We make it clear that the SSC or the appointing authority shall be entitled to exercise the discretion,

in terms of the relevant recruitment rules.

5.

The O.As. are disposed of accordingly.

6.

All the pending M.As. in respective O.As shall stand disposed of.

There shall be no order as to costs.