What does--impleaing additional respondent--means?

Sir,

Please kindly check the actual copy of OA which goes like this....
 

IN THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL AT BANGALORE

O.A.NO. /2013

BETWEEN :

Shiva Murthy S.K,

S/o. Krishna Gowda,

Aged about 27 years,

Resident of “Shivally”, Dudda Hobli,

Mandya Taluk & District. : APPLICANT

AND :

1. The Director General,

Council of Scientific & Industrial Research,

Anusandhan Bhawan,

No.2, Rafi Marg,

New Delhi 110001.

2. The Director,

National Aerospace Laboratories,

Council of Scientific & Industrial Research,

PB No.1779, HAL Airport Road, Kodihalli,

Bangalore-560 017.

3.   The Secretary,

Department of Personal and Training,

North Block,

New Delhi.

4. The Union of India,

Rep. by its Secretary,

Ministry of Health and Family Welfare,

Nirman Bhawan,

New Delhi. : RESPONDENTS

APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 19 OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE

TRIBUNALS ACT, 1985

DETAILS OF APPLICATION

1. ORDERS AGAINST WHICH THE APPLICATION IS MADE :

This application is made against the provisions relating to educational qualification in Advertisement No.3/2013 (ANNEXURE A-1), so far it relates to Post Code T-163/HC(Pharmacist) issued by the 1st respondent.

2. JURISDICTION :

The applicant submits that the subject matter in respect of which the applicant wants redressal is within the jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Tribunal.

3. LIMITATION :

The applicant further submits that the application is within the period of limitation as specified under Section 21 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985.

4. FACTS OF THE CASE :

1. The 1st respondent issued an Advertisement in No.3/2013 calling for Applications On-line and a copy of the said advertisement is produced and marked as ANNEXURE A-1.

2. The subject matter of OA relates to Post Code T-163/HC(Pharmacist) wherein the educational qualification has been mentioned as SSLC / 10th standard pass with science subject with 55% marks plus 2 years Diploma in Pharmacy (D. Pharma), qualified Pharmacist  Registration by Pharmacy Council of India.   

3. The applicant submitted his application as at ANNEXURE A-2.  All the marks cards relating to the applicant are produced and marked as ANNEXURE A-3.

4. The respondents based on the pay and the educational qualification have categorized the Staff in Group wise and with this qualification specified in the impugned advertisement, the post is classified as Group II(1) whereas it should have been classified as Group III(1). An extract CSIR Service Rules 1964 is produced and marked as ANNEXURE A-4.

5. The respondents issued an office memorandum dated 30/9/2012 (ANNEXURE A-5) whereby amendment to CSIR Service Rules 1994 has been issued.

6. Further, entry level qualification in respect of Technical and Support Staff was amended vide letter dated 22/9/2010 (ANNEXURE A-6) which indicates that the qualification is 10+2 with science subject followed by First Class Diploma in Engg / Tech of 3 years full time duration (2/2.5 years full time duration in cases of lateral admission after 10+2, if applicable) or its equivalent.  Prior to this, the modification in the designation of Technical and Support Staff was issued vide letter dated 21/7/2010 (ANNEXURE A-7).

7. From the aforesaid facts, it is prima-facie that the 1st respondent issued a notification contrary to the Rules in force and also has not indicated the Group to which the Recruitment is proposed for.

8. In view of the aforesaid position, the applicant approaches this Hon’ble Tribunal with a prayer to declare that the notification issued in No.3/2013 so far it relates to the post of Pharmacist do not Conform the Rules in force and it shall be declared as Group III(1) and the educational qualification shall be which indicates that the qualification with 10+2 with science subject followed by First Class Diploma in Engg / Tech of 3 years full time duration (2/2.5 years full time duration in cases of lateral admission after 10+2, if applicable) or its equivalent.  Hence this application.

5. GROUNDS WITH LEGAL PROVISIONS :

In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, the applicant urges the following grounds among others in support of his prayer at Para 8 infra.

1. The impugned notification and its provisions relating to educational qualification in Advertisement No.3/2013 (ANNEXURE A-1), so far it relates to Post Code T-163/HC(Pharmacist) issued by the 1st respondent, is liable to be quashed and set aside on the following :

1. There is no Diploma after SSLC or 10th standard. The Diploma from 1978 onwards starts after PUC (ie) 10+2.

2. The CISR Service Rules and its amendment prima-facie establish that the qualification is different and as such, the respondents are required to act in terms of the Recruitment Rules and its amendment. When the amendment was carried out in the year 2010 itself, failure to adhere to the said provision is illegal and arbitrary.

3. The RTI Information (ANNEXURE A-8) furnished by Pharmacy Council of India, prima-facie establish that the minimum qualification for Registered Pharmacist is pass in Diploma, Degree or Pharm D Course from an Institution approved U/S 12 of Pharmacy Act, 1948 and further for Diploma in Pharmacy, the duration is of 2 years and the admission qualification is 10+2 science academic stream with physics, chemistry, mathematics or biology.

4. Further, the applicant produces the Regulations framed under Section 10 of the Pharmacy Act, 1948 (ANNEXURE A-9) which also reiterates the stand furnished under the RTI Act.

5. The applicant produces an extract of Gazette of India, 1973 indicating the pay scale for Pharmacist / Dispenser / Dispenser Clerk and the pay scale is Rs.130-5-75-EB-6-205-7-212-EB-7-240 which prima-facie indicates that the pay scale is Group C pay scale.

6. All India Council for Technical Education Act, 1987 (ANNEXURE A-10) provides a definition of Technical Education as under :

“Technical Education” means programmes of education, research and training in engineering technology, architecture, town planning, management, pharmacy and applied arts and crafts and such other programme or areas as the Central Government may, in consultation with the Council, by notification in the Official Gazette, declare”.

7. The Ministry of Health and Family Welfare issued an office memorandum dated 12/5/1990 (ANNEXURE A-11) indicating that the post of Pharmacist is of technical in nature and visual acuity of High Order is essential. It has therefore been decided that the post of Pharmacist in a hospital / dispensary etc., be declared as technical etc.

8. The applicant also produces the letter issued by the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare dated 9/10/2006 (ANNEXURE A-12) wherein it is stated that :

“As per  Section 42 of the Pharmacy Act, no person other than a registered pharmacist shall compound, prepare, mix or dispense any medicine on the prescripttion of the medical practitioner and whosoever contravenes it, is liable for a punishment for six months, or with fine not exceeding one thousand rupees with both Section 42 has been upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and Allahabad High Court also and is applicable throughout the  country w.e.f. 1/9/1984”

9. It is submitted that  the sister concern of the 1st respondent (ie) CSIR – Central Glass and Ceramic Research Institute, Kolkata , issued an advertisement No.02/2002 calling for application for the Recruitment of Technical Assistants Group III Staff with Pay Band of Rs.9300-34800 with GP of Rs.4200/- where it has been mentioned that first class Diploma in Pharmacy of 3 years full time duration or its equivalent after 10+2 in science stream.

10. It is therefore evident that the pay band 2 with GP of Rs.4200/- is applicable as Technical Assistant, whereas the advertisement issued by the 1st respondent is for Group II(1) pay of Rs.5200-20200 with GP of Rs.1900/- in PB-1.

The V CPC has considered the case of the Para Medical Staff in Para 52.35 to 52.38 and with regard to Pharmacist in Para 52.85 to 52.92. More particularly, in Para 52.90 it has been recommended that the entry level pay shall be Rs.1400-2300 with qualification of 10+2+2 years Diploma+3 years training and registration and the applicant produces the representation dated 26/6/1997 (ANNEXURE A-13) with regard to the pay structure and the promotional avenue to the Pharmacist.

The Sister concern of National Chemical Laboratory, Pune (CSIR), had called for technical staff Group III(1).

The respondents issued a letter dated 29/7/2008 as at ANNEXURE A-14 which indicates that the decision of the Committee on reclassified of Post is pending.

In view of the foregoing, it is prima-facie that the 1st respondent has not followed the rules in force while notifying the educational qualification and consequential appropriate pay scale and thereby the applicant, if the notification is acted upon would be placed in Group II(1) instead of Group III(1) and also in PB 1 instead of PB 2 and with GP of Rs.1900/- instead of Rs.4200/-, for no fault of him.

2. Viewed in any angle, the action of the respondents is arbitrary, discriminatory and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.

6. REMEDIES EXHAUSTED:

The applicant declares that he has exhausted remedies available under the service law and under the facts and circumstances of the case, the applicant has no other efficacious and alternative remedy except approaching this Hon’ble Tribunal for redressal of his grievances.  

7. MATTERS NOT PREVIOUSLY FILED:

The applicant declares that he has not previously filed any application nor any such application, writ or suit is pending before any Court of law on the same cause of action.

8. RELIEF PRAYED FOR :

WHEREFORE, the applicant humbly prays that this Hon’ble Tribunal be pleased to :

1. call for the relevant records leading to the issuance of the impugned notification and its provisions relating to educational qualification in Advertisement No.3/2013 (ANNEXURE A-1), so far it relates to Post Code T-163/HC(Pharmacist) issued by the 1st respondent and on perusal.

2. direct the 1st respondent to consider and modify the provisions relating to educational qualification in Advertisement No.3/2013 (ANNEXURE A-1), so far it relates to Post Code T-163/HC(Pharmacist) issued by the 1st respondent, strictly adhering to the Rules in force while declaring the action of the 1st respondent in not following the Rules, as arbitrary, discriminatory and void for the reasons stated in the application

3. Consequently, direct the 1st respondent to treat the post of Pharmacist as a Technical Post, classified under Group III(1) in the PB 2 with GP of Rs.4200/- and

4. pass any other order or direction or any other relief as deemed fit by this Hon’ble Tribunal, in the interest of justice, equity and fairplay in administration and

9. INTERIM PRAYER, IF ANY :    

Pending disposal of the application and under the facts and circumstances of the case, the applicant humbly prays that this Hon’ble Tribunal be pleased to restrain the 1st respondent from taking further action in pursuance of Advertisement No.3/2013 (ANNEXURE A-1), so far it relates to Post Code T-163/HC(Pharmacist), in the interest of justice and equity.