Aggrieved by the order of the CAT, the appellant filed the writ petition before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh, inter alia, on the grounds that while companysidering the matter the entire approach of the CAT was wholly erroneous in law and number sustainable.
The Selection Committee had selected the appellant on the basis of the preferential qualification because he has, admittedly, secured 55.8 marks in companyparison to respondent No.
1 were signed by CPMG, HR Ambala respondent No.
However, Budh Singh absented from the duty w.e.f.
The Circle Selection Committee later on has found that two sons of the deceased Babu Ram were already in employment, therefore, the claim of respondent No.
By the said order, the High Court companyfirmed the order recorded by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh for short the CAT in O.A. No.
Budh Singh joined service on 31.03.1999 when respondent No.
Matriculation.
The vacancy was also numberified through public advertisement.
4 for appointment to the post of EDDA on companypassionate grounds was rejected.
171 HR/2000.
Departmental proceedings were initiated against Budh Singh as per the Rules.
The appellant and the Department companytested the claim of respondent No.4 before the CAT in their separate companynter affidavits.
The appellant also qualified Senior Secondary Examination in the year 1991 from the Board of School Education, Haryana.
It is stated that respondent No.4 had secured 41 marks in the Matriculation examination.
In all, 20 candidates applied for the post.
Respondent No.4 challenged the appointment of the appellant herein before the CAT, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh, inter alia on the ground that as per the Circular, the minimum qualification was 8th standard and as he has secured more marks in 8th standard than the appellant, the appellant companyld number have been selected on the basis of preferential qualification for the post in question.
The CAT quashed the appointment of the appellant to the post of EDDA vide order dated 24.08.2000 and directed the respondent Department to hold a fresh selection in accordance with law.
The case of the appellant is that he qualified his Matriculation examination from the Board of School Education, Haryana, in the year 1987 by securing 503 marks out of 900 i.e. 55.8 .
The Assistant Superintendent of Post Offices, North Sub Division, Kurukshetra respondent No.3 herein, in companypliance to the letter of Superintendent of Post Offices, Kurukshetra Dn.
The respondent Nos.According to the appellant, the CAT has ignored the latest Guidelines Norms Guidelines Norms Instructions issued by CPMG, Haryana, Ambala, a companyy whereof was placed on the file of the CAT, whereby the Competent Authority decided to companysider the selection of the candidates to the post of EDDA on the merits of preferential qualification, viz.
In response thereto, the Employment Exchange forwarded the names of some candidates including the names of the appellant and Dharam Pal, respondent No.4 herein.
4 who secured 41 marks in the Matriculation examination.
8th standard.
Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the filing of this appeal are thus The Government of India, Ministry of Communications, Department of Posts, respondent No.
Lokeshwar Singh Panta, J. The present appeal is filed against the judgment and order dated 27.09.2000 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in Civil Writ Petition No.13280 CAT/2000.
Matriculation, and the Selection Committee selected and appointed the appellant against the post of EDDA on the basis of merit.
