Rejoinder Format for Central Administrative Tribunal.

Format of Rejoinder to be filed in the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) against the Counter Affidavit filed by the Respondents)

IN THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH : NEW DELHI
O.A. NO.______OF 20________

IN THE MATTER OF :

_____________________ Applicant
Versus
_____________________ Respondents

REJOINDER TO THE COUNTER AFFIDAVIT FILED ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT NO. ________ AND ________

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH
1. With respect to para No. ________ of the counter, it is submitted that the contents thereof are matter of record.

2. With respect to para No. ________of the counter, it is submitted that the contents thereof are matter of record. It is further submitted that the rest of the context in para under reply are misconceived.

3-4 With respect to para No. ________ and ________ of the counter, it is submitted that the contents thereof are matter of record. It is further submitted that on the said official website of Respondent No. ________, two lists were loaded in relation to the above said examination. One list of the successful candidates who had passed the examination and second list was of the candidates whose candidature was rejected for various reasons.

It is further submitted that the Respondents herein issued a list bearing No. ________/________ containing the name of the candidates who have been provisionally selected and recommended for the post of Assistant Teacher (Primary) with government of Delhi and MCD. It is further submitted that in the said that it has also been mentioned that the said result has been declared as per outcome of the court cases. However the Respondents herein did not provide any details of the cases. Therefore this fact also shows illegality on the part of Respondent.

5. With respect to para No.5 of the counter affidavit, it is submitted that the contents thereof are misconceived. It is submitted that the Respondents herein issued office order No. ________ and published a rejection notice for the post of Teacher (Primary). The name of the Petitioner herein figures at serial No. ________ and it has been stated that she becomes overage on this very ground, she was declared to be unsuccessful candidate.

6. With respect to para No. ________ of the counter affidavit, it is submitted that the contents thereof are misconceived. It is submitted that the Petitioner herein entitled to get selected for the post of teacher (Primary) in view of the judgment and order dated ________in ________and Others Vs. Delhi Subordinate Service Selection Board. Therefore the rest of the contents in para under reply has no substance and hence are denied.

7. With respect to para No. ________ of the counter affidavit, it is submitted that the contents thereof are vehemently denied. It is also denied that the Petitioner/ Applicant is not having ___ Course. However, the Applicant herein has compl___________d her D. Ed. Diploma in Education in the year ___________ and same is equivalent to ________. Therefore the facts of the present case are squarely covered under the case of ___________& Ors. Vs. ___________ W.P. (C) No___________of ___. It is further submitted that para No.59 of the said judgment is also applicable to the Applicant herein and her legal right cannot be taken away by the Respondents as she is entitled for candidature as mentioned above.

8. With respect to para No.8 of the counter affidavit, it is submitted that the contents thereof are misconceived and hence are denied. It is also denied that the Applicant herein is not having requisite qualification of ___________, though the fact remains that D. Ed. Course is equivalent to the ___________ course and Applicant herein was working last 3 years as an adhoc teacher in Delhi. Therefore she is entitled to get selected for the post of teacher (Primary).

REJOINDER TO PARAWISE REPLY
1. With respect to para No.1 of the parawise reply, it is submitted that the contents thereof are wrong and hence are denied. It is also denied that the Petitioner/ Applicant is not having ___________ course as per the directions given in the judgment. It may be relevant to point out that in the present matter, it is more than clear that the Applicant herein has compl___________d the JBT/ ___________ couse in the year 2006 and as such she is entitled to get the relaxation as given in Sachin Gupta case and an advertisement came to be issued by the Respondents in pursuance of the Sachin Gupta case relating to the appointment of primary teacher in the month of December, 2009.

2-3 With respect to para No.2 and 3 of the parawise reply, it is submitted that the contents thereof do not require any rejoinder.

4.1 With respect to para No.4 of the parawise reply, it is submitted that the contents thereof are vehemently denied. It is also denied that candidature of the Applicant herein cannot be rejected on the ground of disqualification as she is having requisite qualification as per Sachin Gupta�s case. Accordingly the case of the Sachin Gupta�s is squarely applicable to the facts of the present case. It is also submitted with great respect that D. Ed. Course is equivalent to the ___________ course.

4.2-4.3 With respect to para No.4.2 � 4.3 of the parawise reply, it is submitted that the contents thereof do not require any rejoinder.

4.4 With respect to para No.4.4 of the parawise reply, it is submitted that the contents thereof are wrong and denied. It is also denied that Petitioner has not mentioned anywhere that she is having equivalent qualification. It is submitted that para No.1 of list of dates at page A mentioned that Applicant has diploma. It is further submitted that the Petitioner herein has urged before this Tribunal that the Petitioner herein has been working in the State of Haryana as an Assistant Teacher in the category of JBT and as such she is entitled to get age relaxation of age throughout.

4.5 With respect to para No.4.5 of the parawise reply, it is submitted that the contents thereof do not require any rejoinder.

4.6 With respect to para No.4.6 of the parawise reply, it is submitted that the contents thereof are wrong. It is also wrong that Applicant was not having eligibility. The Applicant herein is eligible for candidature as per the documents which she has diploma in D. Ed. Course which is equivalent to JBT/ ___________. Therefore her candidature cannot be rejected on the one or other grounds.

4.7 With respect to para No.4.7 of the parawise reply, it is submitted that the contents thereof do not require any rejoinder.

4.8 With respect to para No.4.8 of the parawise reply, it is submitted that the contents thereof are vehemently denied. It is also wrong that in the facts of the present case the judgment of Sachin Gupta is applicable. The Respondents are not permitted to reject the candidature of the Petitioner.

4.9 With respect to para No.4.9 of the parawise reply, it is submitted that the contents thereof are wrong and hence denied. It is also denied that Sachin Gupta case has not been misrepresented by the Applicant herein, the said case is applicable to the facts and circumstances of the present case as ___________ is equivalent to JBT and D. Ed. Course.
It may be relevant to mention here that in para No.4 the Respondent herein has mentioned that Petitioner �nowhere mentioned that candidates having equivalent qualification will also be benefited�. However in para under reply he states that �no equivalent qualification will also be benefited�. Therefore there has been a contradiction in para No.4.4 and 4.9 of the reply.

4.10 With respect to para No.4.10 of the parawise reply, it is submitted that the contents thereof are wrong and hence are denied. It is also denied that working as teacher cannot be claimed as right of employment as a teacher everywhere. However the contents of corresponding para under reply is reiterated.

4.11 With respect to para No.4.11 of the parawise reply, it is submitted that the contents thereof do not require any rejoinder.

4.12 With respect to para No.4.12 of the parawise reply, it is submitted that the contents thereof are wrong and misconceived. It is also wrong that the Applicant is claiming for the candidature on the basis of experience as Assistant Teacher in Haryana though she has requisite qualification as prescribed in advertisement issued in pursuance to the direction of Sachin Gupta case.

4.13 With respect to para No.4.13 of the parawise reply, it is submitted that the contents thereof do not require any rejoinder.

4.14 With respect to para No.4.14 of the parawise reply, it is submitted that the contents thereof are wrong. It is wrong to say that judgment of Sachin Gupta has misrepresented. The fact remains that the said judgment is applicable to the facts of the present case. Therefore the submission made in para under reply are misconceived and hence are denied.

4.15 With respect to para No.4.15 of the parawise reply, it is submitted that the contents thereof are denied. It is also wrong that the Applicant has misinterpreted the judgment. It is submitted with great respect that the Applicant herein is eligible for candidature as per the Sachin Gupta case and as such her claim cannot said to be rejected on the basis of false submission.

4.16 -4.20 With respect to para No.4.16- 4.20 of the parawise reply, it is submitted that the contents thereof do not require any rejoinder.

4.21 With respect to para No.4.21 of the parawise reply, it is submitted that the contents thereof are wrong and denied. It is also wrong that Applicant is not falling under the conditions as put by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in Sachin Gupta case of the Petitioner/ Applicant is squarely covered under the said judgment. The rest of the contents of para under reply are matter of record.

4.22 With respect to para No.4.22 of the parawise reply, it is submitted that the contents thereof do not require any rejoinder.

4.23 With respect to para No.4.23 of the parawise reply, it is submitted that the contents thereof denied. It is denied that there has been any misinterpretation of the judgment as mentioned above. The Applicant is having equivalent diploma in D. Ed. Course and having rich experience in teaching.
4.24 With respect to para No.4.24 of the parawise reply, it is submitted that the contents thereof are wrong. It is submitted that the Applicant is also entitled to get benefit of Sachin Gupta case with regard to age relaxation. Therefore she cannot be treated as overage.
4.25 With respect to para No.4.25 of the parawise reply, it is submitted that the contents thereof are wrong. The Petitioner herein does not misrepresent the judgment titled as Sachin Gupta vs.

THROUGH;

COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER

Dated: __.__.________