Soni Bose.D v. Union Of India

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY TUESDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2015/21ST ASWINA, 1937 OP (CAT).No. 161 of 2015 (Z) ----------------------------- OA 1201/2012 of CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM BENCH DATED 12-06-2015 PETITIONER:

------------------- SONI BOSE D., D/O. CHANDRA BOSE, C.D.BHAVAN, KILIKOLLUR P.O., KOLLAM - 691 004.

BY ADVS.SRI.A.JAYASANKAR SRI.C.V.MANUVILSAN SRI.MANU GOVIND RESPONDENTS:

-----------------------

1. UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF SPACE, ANTARIKSH BHAVAN, NEW BEL ROAD, BANGALORE-560231.

2. LIQUID PROPULSION SYSTEM CENTRE, INDIAN SPACE RESEARCH ORGANIZATION, VALIYAMALA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 547

3. ANUSHREE P., JUNIOR HINDI TRANSLATOR, LIQUID PROPULSION SYSTEM CENTRE, INDIAN SPACE RESEARCH ORGANIZATION, VALIYAMALA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 547

4. SREEJA R., JUNIOR HINDI TRANSLATOR, LIQUID PROPULSION SYSTEM CENTRE, INDIAN SPACE RESEARCH ORGANIZATION, VALIYAMALA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 547

5. NEETHU P.T., JUNIOR HINDI TRANSLATOR, LIQUID PROPULSION SYSTEM CENTRE INDIAN SPACE RESEARCH ORGANIZATION, VALIYAMALA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 547

OP(CAT) NO. 161/2015

6. VIJAY SEKHAR T., JUNIOR HINDI TRANSLATOR, LIQUID PROPULSION SYSTEM CENTRE, INDIAN SPACE RESEARCH ORGANIZATION, VALIYAMALA PO, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 547

7. CIMY ASAF, JUNIOR HINDI TRANSLATOR, LIQUID PROPULSION SYSTEM CENTRE, INDIAN SPACE RESEARCH ORGANIZATION, VALIYAMALA PO, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 547

8. SMITHA J.M., JUNIOR HINDI TRANSLATOR, LIQUID PROPULSION SYSTEM CENTRE, INDIAN SPACE RESEARCH ORGANIZATION, VALIYAMALA PO, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 547

9. MANISH MANEKAR, JUNIOR HINDI TRANSLATOR, LIQUID PROPULSION SYSTEM CENTRE, INDIAN SPACE RESEARCH ORGANIZATION, VALIYAMALA PO, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 547

10. LEENA B.L., JUNIOR HINDI TRANSLATOR, LIQUID PROPULSION SYSTEM CENTRE, INDIAN SPACE RESEARCH ORGANIZATION, VALIYAMALA PO, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 547

11. VIKAS KUMAR SHAW, JUNIOR HINDI TRANSLATOR, LIQUID PROPULSION SYSTEM CENTRE, INDIAN SPACE RESEARCH ORGANIZATION, VALIYAMALA PO, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 547

12. DEEPALAKSHMI R., JUNIOR HINDI TRANSLATOR, LIQUID PROPULSION SYSTEM CENTRE INDIAN SPACE RESEARCH ORGANIZATION, VALIYAMALA PO, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 547

13. ANUPA R., JUNIOR HINDI TRANSLATOR, LIQUID PROPULSION SYSTEM CENTRE, INDIAN SPACE RESEARCH ORGANIZATION, VALIYAMALA PO, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 547

14. RAJESH KUMAR, JUNIOR HINDI TRANSLATOR, LIQUID PROPULSION SYSTEM CENTRE, INDIAN SPACE RESEARCH ORGANIZATION, VALIYAMALA PO, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 547

15. KUMAR ASHOK HARSHAVARDHAN, JUNIOR HINDI TRANSLATOR, LIQUID PROPULSION SYSTEM CENTRE, INDIAN SPACE RESEARCH ORGANIZATION, VALIYAMALA PO, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 547

OP(CAT) NO. 161/2015

16. SHALINI SASI, JUNIOR HINDI TRANSLATOR LIQUID PROPULSION SYSTEM CENTRE, INDIAN SPACE RESEARCH ORGANIZATION, VALIYAMALA PO, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 547 R1,R2 BY ADV. SRI.N.NAGARESH, ASSISTANT SOLICITOR GENERAL THIS OP (CAT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13-10-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

OP (CAT).No. 161 of 2015 (Z) APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 :

TRUE COPY OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.1201/2012 FILED BEFORE THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL , ERNAKULAM BENCH WITH ANNEXURES.

ANNEXURE A3 COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 30.03.2012 FROM THE FIRST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.

ANNEXURE A4 COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 07.05.2012 FROM THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.

ANNEXURE A1 COPY OF THE OTIFICATION DATED 10.06.2011 PUBLISHED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT ANNEXURE A2 COPY OF THE CALL LETTER DATED 09.11.2011 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.

ANNEXURE A5 COPY OF THE INFORMATION DATED 01.02.2012 PROVIDED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.

ANNEXURE A6 COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY DATED 12.03.2012.

ANNEXURE A7 COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 06.06.2012 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P2 :

A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY STATEMENT WITH ANNEXURES. ANNEXURE R1 SELECT PANEL FOR UR CANDIDATES ANNEXURE R2 SELECT PANEL FOR OBC CANDIDATES ANNEXURE R3 LETTER TO THE HON'BLE PRIME MINISTER BY THE PETITIONER. ANNEXURER4 REPLY TO THE PETITIONER.

ANNEXURE R5 LETTER NO LPSC/ADMN/RTI/2012-251 ANNEXURE R6 LETTER NO. PPR: D: RTI:2012:2019 ANNEXURE R7 LETTER NO. LPSC/ADMN/RTI/265 ANNEXURE R8 PROCEEDINGS OF THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY, RTI.

ANNEXURE R9 APPLICATION BY THE APPLICANT UNDER RTI ANNEXURE R10 LETTER NO. CPIO:DOS:RTI:2012:2320

OP(CAT) NO. 161/2015 EXHIBIT P3 :

A COPY OF THE ORDER DT 12-6-2015 IN OA.NO.1201/2012. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE.

K. SURENDRA MOHAN & SHAJI P. CHALY, JJ.

------------------------------- O.P(CAT) NO.161 OF 2015 ---------------------------------- Dated this the 13th October, 2015.

JUDGMENT

Surendra Mohan, J.

The petitioner was an applicant for selection and appointment to the post of Junior Hindi Translator. She had applied for the post, pursuant to a notification issued by the second respondent. The petitioner participated in a written test that was conducted on 25.9.2011. Thereafter, she had appeared for an interview held on 10.12.2011. The allegation of the petitioner is that, though she was fully qualified and entitled to be selected and appointed to the post, persons with lesser qualifications were selected and appointed by the second respondent. Raising the above contentions, she has approached the Central Administrative Tribunal ('CAT' for short), Ernakulam Bench by filing O.A.

OP(CAT)161/2015 1201/2012. The CAT has considered the contentions of the petitioner, in the light of the stand taken by the respondents in the reply statement that was filed.

2. According to the respondents, the ISRO being a prominent Research and Development Organisation in the area of Space Research and Technology, national importance requires utmost weightage to be given to the merit of the candidates for selection to the various posts. The petitioner had participated in the written test as well as the interview but her performance did not entitle her to be selected to the post that was notified for the reason that there were other candidates more meritorious than her. Therefore, the persons who had obtained higher marks in the written test as well as interview have been selected. The Tribunal has noted that, though the petitioner had raised allegations against the selection of some of the candidates, she was not able to produce any evidence or material to support her contention that she was more meritorious than the candidates who were selected.

OP(CAT)161/2015

3. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner at length and have perused the documents produced before us. We notice that even before us, absolutely no material or evidence has been produced, to warrant a conclusion that any person with lesser merit than the petitioner was selected, as alleged. In the absence of any such material the contentions of the petitioner cannot be accepted. We remind us that the petitioner is a person who has participated in the selection process and has failed to get herself selected.

4. The above being the factual scenario, we find no grounds to admit this original petition or to grant any of the reliefs sought for by the petitioner. The Original Petition fails and is accordingly dismissed.

Sd/- K. SURENDRA MOHAN Judge Sd/- SHAJI P.CHALY Judge jj