Tribunals have considered the submissions. In our view, error is apparent in the order of the Tribunal, as the status of the applicant-respondent has not been the same as that of Shivendra Pal or Naresh Bagri. They were working as driv..
Tribunals have considered the submissions. In our view, error is apparent in the order of the Tribunal, as the status of the applicant-respondent has not been the same as that of Shivendra Pal or Naresh Bagri. They were working as driver, which is a Group C post on no work no wages basis; whereas the applicant-respondent was working as a casual worker with temporary status. It is a matter of common knowledge that appointment as causal worker is made against Group D post. Besides, it is also not mentioned in the order of the Tribunal that the applicant had ever applied for the post of Driver. Thus, the applicant not having worked on the post of Driver on casual basis cannot claim benefit of age relaxation or other relaxation which has been extended to Shivender Pal and Naresh Bagri in terms of the order of the Tribunal. In view of the above, in our view, the Review Application deserves to be allowed. It is accordingly allowed. The order of the Tribunal dated 22.12.2011 is hereby recalled and the OA is restored to its original number. Let the OA itself be listed for final disposal on 29.5.2014.
