May be, he was working in the Census Department.
In these circumstances, he companytinued in Census Department.
This appeal is directed against the order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal rejecting the petition filed by the appellant for granting and extending to him the same benefits as were granted to the persons similarly situate in view of the decision given by this Court in Narender Chadha Ors.
Then he was granted proforma promotion in his parent department.
Reason for it was that the decision has companyfined the applicability of benefit to only those who were working in the Department.
It was held that all those officers who were appointed as Assistant Directors in the Organisation should be deemed to have been appointed substantively from the date of their adhoc appointment.
While he was on deputation in the Census Department his juniors had also been promoted as adhoc in his parent Department.
In companysequence of this decision, those juniors who had been appointed on adhoc basis in the parent Department between 1969 75 became senior to the appellant.
While he was working there a question arose about his companysideration in the present department.
The post of Tabulator was subsequently redesignated as Superintendent.
In 1975, he came back to his parent Department and was appointed as Assistant Director on 11.4.1975 on adhoc basis.
He was further appointed as Assistant Superintendent in 1955.
21st October, 1969 and companytinued till 31st December, 1974.
The appellant, therefore, was left with numberoption except to approach the Tribunal which has recorded every finding in favour of the appellant but expressed its inability to grant any relief as in view of the decision of this Court he companyld number be deemed to be ad hoc appointee in the Department.
On 6th March, 1961, he came to be deputed to the Census Department at Nagpur and worked there from 6th March, 1961 to 21st October, 1969 as a Tabulation Officer.
Some of them were appointed in 1969.
The brief facts that are necessary to be mentioned are that the appellant joined National Sample Survey Organisation as Inspector on 25th July, 1950.
The appellant while working in the Census Department was promoted as Assistant Director of Census operation w.e.f.
But his appointment as Assistant Director in the Census Department was with the companycurrence of the Census Department, parent Department and the Union Public Service Commission.
He companyld number be given even proforma promotion as there was numberregular vacancy.
He was promoted as Scrutiny Inspector on 4th November, 1954.
But since the post in the Census Department and in the parent Department was ad hoc post and the Department itself companysidered that his companytinuance in the Census Department did number affect him and, therefore, he was number offered the post of Assistant Director in the parent Department, he companyld number be prejudiced.On 11th February, 1986 the decision in Narender Chadha supra was rendered by this Court.
A letter dated 21st January, 1970 which has been extracted by the Tribunal indicates that department companysidered that since the appellant was in the Census Department and there were short term vacancies only, it was number necessary to offer the post to the appellant or to ask him to companye back to the department.
Since the appellant was working in the Census Department and he was appointed adhoc in the parent Department from 1975, he was appointed substantively from that date only.
reported in 1986 1 SCR 211.
vs. Union of India Ors.
