The petitioners were applicants for the post of Member support Staff SII in the respondent Organisation vide Advertisement in October 2010 Subsequently, The respondents have conducted test and interview to the said post and shortlisted successful candidates and appointed all shortlisted candidates except 9 candidates of which two are the petitioners in this writ petition. The petitioners are challenging the appointments of five of the shortlisted candidates, who do not meet either the educational qualifications or the upper age limit prescribed in the advertisement. Relaxation of educational qualification of two candidates and relaxation of age for another three candidates when qualified hands are in the recommended selection list by the selection Committee are illegal and are violating not only the bye-laws and recruitment rules of the respondent organization but also all Central govt. rules and regulations and principles of natural justice. Due to these irregularities, the petitioners who were well qualified as per the prescribed eligibility and subsequent written test and interview and thereby got included in the recommended list for appointment by the Selection Committee for these posts, were deprived of their deserving appointment. The repeated representations given by petitioner No 1 was not even replied by the respondent Organisation. The petitioners are deprived of the very fundamental rights vide Art 14, Art 16 and Art 21 of the Constitution of India. Hence this writ petition.
Writ petition was heard in HC.But HC was reluctant to admit as this happened in 2011. Myself as counsel argued this as a mistake from the resp. Org as no reply was given for 2 representations. Petitioners being public at lower ed.qualiF ITI fitter do not know central govt rules of griev. Redressal set up. Etc. Also my substantive rights are subsisting by Art 14 and Art 16. Court disposed the case asking to approach Central Adm Tribunal or appropriate authority as this central govt was listed in CAT.
MY QUESTION IS
if I approach CAT limitation is tougher, even if sufficient cause as given in limitation Act is shown with SC judgments, CAT has its discretion to condone the delay or not. As per several judgments chances are very little to condone as long delay, evenif due to fraud or mistake from resp.org
Now if the petitioners give a repre. to the ministry which is the first party in this writ also the highest authority of the resp. Org , two weeks time to decide as they were not aware of the illegal recruitments done, will it be fruitful
File appln in CAT directly, which if rejected appeal in HC. Will HC admit this case, if not what are next options we have to fight against this gross violation from a central govt?
Kindly give which SC judgments can save the petitioners