c/o Human Rights Law Network
Tel: 24379857 email: email@example.com
1. Prof. D.P.Agrawal,
Union Public Service Commission,
2. Dr. Syamal Kumar Sarkar,
Department of Personnel & Training,
3. Shri Bimal Julka,
Ministry of Information & Broadcasting
Sub: In the Supreme Court of India, Civil Appeal 4387 of 2007 in the matter of Association of UPSC Recruited Programme Officers of AIR and DD Vs Union of India & Others.
I write this letter in response to the letters written by Secretary, Ministry of Information & Broadcasting to you and other persons seeking to pressurise UPSC and DOP&;T to revise the stand taken by UPSC and DOP&T as found in Secretary UPSC Shri A. Bhattacharya’s affidavits dated 22nd March 2012 , the DOP&T advisory to the UPSC dated 6th March 2012 and the subsequent communication of UPSC to the Ministry of I&B dated 20th March 2013 filed before the Principal Bench of CAT, New Delhi in C.P. No. 217/2005 in O.A.No.399/2001.
In this regard my colleague Adv Svetlana Correya had addressed a letter to you dated 06.05.2013 bringing to your attention that the application filed in the Supreme Court by the All India Radio and Doordarshan Programme Professional Association on behalf of the staff artists, seeking to challenge the stand of the UPSC and DOPT as stated in the abovementioned affidavits, was dismissed by the Supreme Court as recent as 18.04.13. The legal notice dated 6.05.13 together with the order of the Supreme Court dated 18.04.13 is annexed with this letter for your convenience.
Though fully aware that the staff artists had failed to convince the Supreme Court that the stand of the UPSC and DOP&T as stated in the above mentioned affidavits/communications was wrong , the Secretary I&B is now seeking to pressurise UPSC and DOP&T to revise their stand in accordance with the above mentioned application made by the erstwhile contractual staff artists in the Supreme Court , which was dismissed. The Secretary I &B is attempting to interfere with the Court proceedings even though he knows that the matter is fixed for final hearing in the Supreme Court and is showing on the cause list. There is thus deliberate and willful interference with the course of justice.
In fact, in a companion matter being Union of India Vs Satish Chandra Mathur (Civil Appeal No. 12801 of 1996 dated 1.5.2001), the Supreme Court has already decided a matter similar to the present civil appeal No.4387/2007. Copy of the decision of the
is annexed with this letter , wherein the Supreme Court has upheld the
principle of Screening by UPSC for
appointment/induction in the grade of Programme Executive , as provided in the
statutory rules (Rule 4A of the All India Radio Group B Posts Recruitment(Amendment)
Rules of 23.10.1984). You will notice that the stand taken in the affidavits of
UPSC and DOPT above mentioned are in consonance with this Supreme Court
decision. The Secretary, I&B would have you act contrary to this Supreme
The pressurising attempts of the Secretary I&B and his persistence in acting contrary to law will be brought to the notice of the Supreme Court when the matter is finally argued shortly. The Chairperson , UPSC and the Secretary, DOPT are requested not to succumb to his pressure and to act in accordance with their above mentioned affidavits filed before the Hon’ble CAT Delhi, against which applications were filed in the Supreme Court supported by I&B’s stance in the matter and this application has been dismissed. There is therefore no impediment to UPSC and DOP& T acting strictly in accordance with the affidavits dated 19.1.2012, Secretary UPSC’s affidavit dated 22.3.2012 with the DOP&T advisory to UPSC dated 6.3.2012 and UPSC Communication dated 20.3.2013 above mentioned. Secretary UPSC’s affidavit dated 22.3.2012 incorporating the DOP&T advisory to UPSC dated 6.3.2012 and UPSC Communication dated 20.3.2013 are annexed hereto.