- (1.) AT the request of the parties, arguments were heard and the writ petition is being disposed off finally.
(2.) BRIEFLY stated the facts of the case are that petitioner-Association filed Original Application No.173/2011 before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal'), challenging the order Annexure A-1 dated 30.03.2011 (annexed with the original application), whereby the persons, who were holding the post of Assistant Accounts Officer(Ad-hoc), were not treated as eligible to appear in Incentive Examinations of AAOs'. Learned Tribunal vide its order dated 05.05.2011, disposed off the Original Application with a direction to respondents to decide the representations of applicants-Association within a period of two months. In fact, representations filed by petitioner-Association had already been decided, therefore, petitioner-Association filed a review application, but the same was also dismissed by the Tribunal vide order dated 27.05.2011. In these circumstances, petitioner has preferred this writ petition challenging the orders dated 05.05.2011 as well as 27.05.2011 passed by the Tribunal. Submission of the learned counsel for petitioner is that representation filed by petitioner-Association had already been decided, therefore, the Tribunal committed an illegality in issuing direction to decide the representations of petitioner. It is further submitted that the said fact was not considered and again the review application, filed by petitioner-Association, was dismissed. He further submitted that petitioner-Association has filed an additional affidavit dated 12.04.2012 along with letter dated 11.05.2010, issued by the Sr. Administrative Officer(App.), Office of the Comptroller & Auditor General of India, New Delhi, wherein it has been clarified that officials regularized against regular temporary posts of AAO or promoted as AAO(Ad-hoc) would also be classified as Group 'B' Gazetted for all purpose. He, therefore, submitted that in view of clarification given by respondents, petitioners were eligible to appear in the examination and, therefore, the writ petition may be allowed. It is further submitted that this Court vide interim order dated 07.06.2011, provisionally permitted the members of the petitioner Association to enroll themselves by way of making online registration for ensuing incentive examinations of 2011 for SO/AAOs of A & E offices as well as the requisite training thereof, but the result has not been declared because of pendency of this writ petition and now the last date of the same Incentive Examinations of 2012 is 27th April, 2012, therefore, while holding that members of petitioner-Association were eligible to appear in 2011 Examinations, the respondents may be directed to declare their result. Learned counsel for respondents has submitted that the letter/clarification i.e. 11.05.2010 was issued by the respondents, but it means that AAOs'(Ad-hoc), who were promoted, were not equivalent with AAOs', promoted/regularized on regular temporary basis for the purpose of eligibility to appear in the Incentive Examinations. This clarification shows that for the purpose of discharging of duties by the AAOs', they were treated as equal. We have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and examined the orders passed by the Tribunal as well as the documents, annexed with the writ petition, reply, additional affidavit filed by petitioner-Association including clarificatory letter dated 11.05.2010.
(3.) THE controversy in the present matter is as to whether the persons, who were promoted as AAO(Ad-hoc) should be treated as eligible to appear in the Incentive Examinations of 2011 and they should be treated at par with the AAOs' holding their posts on regular temporary basis. To cut short the controversy, it will be useful to reproduce the letter dated 11.05.2010, issued by the respondents, as under:- No.540-NGE(App.)/19-2010/Vol.II 9, , -110 124 OFFICE OF THE COMPTROLLER & AUDIToR GENERAL OF INDIA 9, Deendayal Upadhyay Marg,New Delhi-110 124 /DATE 11/5/10 To The Pr. Accountant General(A&E), Rajasthan, Jaipur-302005 Subject: Regarding clarifying the status of AAO(RT) and AAO(Ad-hoc). Madam, I am directed to invite a reference to your office letter No. LC/2009-10/K-66/89 dated 17-02-2010 on the subject cited above and to clarify that the officials regularized against regular temporary posts of AAO or promoted as AAO(Ad-hoc) would also be classified as Group 'B' Gazetted for all purpose. Yours faithfully, Sd/- (Narendra Singh) Sr. Administrative Officer(App.) From the above letter, it is clear that officials regularized against regular temporary posts of AAO or promoted as AAO(Ad-hoc) were classified as Group 'B' Gazetted for all purpose. The words for all purpose used by the respondents in the above letter, make it clear that all the AAOs' promoted as Ad-hoc or regular temporary basis, were treated as one group i.e. Group 'B' Gazetted for all purpose. ;