-------------------------------------------------------
CHANDIGARH BENCH
O. A. No.060/00691/2016 Date of decision: 02.08.2016
CORAM: HON BLE MR. SANJEEV KAUSHIK, MEMBER (J).
HON BLE MR. UDAY KUMAR VARMA, MEMBER (A).
1. Ramesh Kumar Sharma son of Shri J. L. Sharma, aged 50 years, Senior Accountant, Office of the Accountant General (A&E), Haryana, Chandigarh.
2. Subhash Chander Bhanwar son of of Shri Shishu Ram, aged 54 years, Senior Accountant, Office of the Accountant General (A&E), Haryana, Chandigarh.
3. Santosh Kumar son of Shri Ram Chander Parshad, aged 39 years, Senior Accountant, Office of the Accountant General (A&E), Haryana, Chandigarh
(All the applicants are Group C employees).
APPLICANTS
VERSUS
1. Union of India through Comptroller and Auditor General of India, 10-Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi.
2. Account General (A&E), Haryana, Sector 33-B, Chandigarh.
RESPONDENTS
PRESENT: Sh. A. L. Vohra, counsel for the applicant.
ORDER
HON BLE MR. SANJEEV KAUSHIK, MEMBER (J):-
1. The present O.A. has been filed seeking mainly following relief(s):-
8(ii) Provision of limiting the chances to ten as per Annexure A-2 and A-4, and arbitrary and illegal system of negative marking of SAS Examination (Annexure A-3) be quashed and set aside.
(iii) Directions be issued to respondents to permit the applicants to clear the examination with unlimited chances as provided in para 9.2.10 of Controller of Audit General s Manual Standing Orders (Administrative) Vol.I (Third Edition) without concept of negativity.
2. In support of his claim, learned counsel for the applicants submitted that applicants no.1 and 3 have cleared Part I of SAS Examination, whereas applicant no.2 has not been successful. He submitted that as per para 9.2.10 of Controller of Audit General s Manual Standing Orders (Administrative) Vol.I (Third Edition) (Annexure A-3), the persons who appear in Part I examination and do not clear all the papers, but have secured 30% marks, can avail indefinite chances to clear the examination and with regard to Part-II examination, there is no limit for number of chances to clear the same. He submitted that when applicant no.1 and 3 had applied for online examinations, scheduled to be held in August, 2016, their applications were not accepted, therefore, they made representations in pursuance of above cited clause for considerations. He submitted that vide letter dated 06.04.2016, the respondents have informed them that they have already constituted a Committee to look into the matter. He submitted that since they have decided to hold examination in August 2016, therefore, the applicants may be allowed to appear provisionally in the said examination.
3. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the entire matter. Since vide letter dated 06.04.2016, the respondents have informed that they have already constituted a Committee to look into the matter, we deem it appropriate that at the first instance the respondents should decide the representation of the applicants before the date of examination. Hence, the present O.A. is disposed of with a direction to the competent authority amongst the respondents to take a view on the pending representations of the applicants by passing a reasoned and speaking order, before they decide to conduct examination. Orders so passed be also communicated to the applicant.
4. Disposal of this O.A. in above terms may not be construed as an expression of any opinion on the merits of the case.
(UDAY KUMAR VARMA) (SANJEEV KAUSHIK)
MEMBER (A) MEMBER (J)
Date: 02.08.2016.
Place: Chandigarh.
No comments:
Post a Comment