Chandigarh 22nd November : The Division Bench of Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh has disposed of a bunch of 14 cases of PGI employees filed against the illegal and unconstitutional action of PGI management in granting reservations in promotions in violation of law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in M Nagraj’s case. The PGI Administration has even allowed accelerated promotions to reserved category employees on the basis of consequential seniority ignoring ‘catch up principle, decided by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Union of India vs Virpal Singh Chauhan 1995 (4) SCT 695 (decided on 10.10.1995) wherein it was reiterated that reservations in promotions is not warranted by Article 16(4) (A) of the Constitution of India.
The Hon’ble Bench has further recorded that though the Hon’ble Supreme Court did uphold the constitutionality of the 85th Constitutional Amendment but it did not minced words by announcing that the denial of Catch up Rule could validly come about only if the relevant dispensation had undertaken an appropriate survey on the quantifiable data regarding the adequacy of representation and had recorded a conscious finding on the basis thereof that ‘the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes …. Are not adequately represented in the services under the State. That the Union of India had not undertaken such an exercise, was held by the Punjab and Haryana High Court, on point of fact, in Lachmi Narayan Gupta & others Vs Union of India, decided on 15.7.2011.
The denial of Catch up Rule to the General Category candidates can validly come about only after the exercise mandated in M Nagraj case had been undertaken by the relevant dispensation. That exercise is not proved to have been undertaken at all by all of them and there is no averment that the PGI had undertaken any such exercise at its own level.
The Hon’ble Bench further held that the PGI had already implemented the catch up rule in the case of Gurmail Ram.
In the light of above, the Hon’ble Bench allowed all the OAs and directed the PGI and UOI to grant the benefit of Catch up Rule. It further directed that the implementation of the order must come about within one month from the date of a copy of order is delivered.
The undersigned filed an OA No. 361 of 2012 titled Ramesh Kumar Arora vs UOI and other, and pleaded in person on behalf of 13 medical technologists in person.