Central Administrative Tribunal
Neha Sharma vs SCHOOL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT on 31 December 2021
:: 1 ::
O.A. No. 61/1913/2021
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
JAMMU BENCH, JAMMU
Hearing through video conferencing
O.A. No. 61/1913/2021
M.A. No. 61/2034/2021
This the 31st day of December, 2021
HON’BLE MR. RAKESH SAGAR JAIN, MEMBER (J)
HON’BLE MR. ANAND MATHUR, MEMBER (A)
1.
Neha Sharma, age 26 years D/o Gopal Krishan R/o Raipur Bhalwal, Jammu.
181122.
2.
Lalita Motten, age 28 years D/o Kamal Chand R/o Halqa, Teh & District Jammu.
181122.
3.
Shamim Akhtar, age 28 years D/o Ch. Mohd Sadiq R/o Village Pargalta Sarah, Jammu. 180017.
4.
Mohd. Sagir, 29 years S/o Mohd. Mustafa R/o Jagti, Jammu. 181121.
5.
Lima Akhtar, age 28 years D/o Nazir Ahmed R/o Raipur Bagani, Jammu. 181123.
6.
Amandeep Singh, age 27 years S/o Prithpal Singh R/o Chak Mohd. Yar, R.S.
Pura, Jammu. 181102.
7.
Jaffer Hussain, age 32 years S/o Bagh Ali R/o Ward NO. 59, Paloura, Jammu.
181102.
8.
Rohit Sharma, age 32 years S/o Rampal Sharma R/o Kirpalpur, Jourian, Akhnoor, Jammu. 181202.
........Applicants
(Advocate:- Mr.Monu S. Khera)
versus
1.
Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir
Through Department of School Education,
Civil Secretariat Jammu/Srinagar 180001.
:: 2 ::
Page 1 of 3
2.
Director School Education, Jammu 181205.
3.
Chief Education Officer, Jammu 180001.
………………..Respondents
(Advocate: Mr.Hunar Gupta, DAG)
O R D E R
[O R A L]
(Delivered by Hon’ble Mr. Rakesh Sagar Jain, Member-J)
MA 61/2034/2021 has been filed seeking permission to file the present OA on behalf of 8 applicants jointly. The MA is allowed.
2. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that for redressal of their grievance, the applicants have already preferred representation dated 15.03.2021 (Annexure A-7) and objections dated 20.08.2021 against non-inclusion of their names in the tentative seniority list.
3. Learned counsel for the applicants has fairly submitted that the applicants would be satisfied, if a direction is given to the respondents to consider and decide their representation dated 15.03.2021 (Annexure A-7) and objections dated 20.08.2021 against non-inclusion of their names in the tentative seniority list in a time bound manner. He further submits that while deciding the representations, the present OA may also be treated as part of representation.
4. Looking to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicants, there is no need to call for counter from the respondents and the OA can be disposed of at the admission stage itself.
:: 3 ::
Page 2 of 3
5. Accordingly, the O.A. is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider representation dated 15.03.2021 (Annexure A-7) and objections dated 20.08.2021 against non-inclusion of their names in the tentative seniority list within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. While deciding the representations, this OA may also be treated as part of representation of the applicants. The order so passed shall be communicated to the applicants forthwith.
6. It is made clear that we have not entered into the merits of the case.
7. No order as to costs.
(ANAND MATHUR) (RAKESH SAGAR JAIN)
MEMBER (A) MEMBER (J)
/yaksh/
Page 3 of 3
Loading citations and judicial treatment…