KENDRIYA VIDYALAYA Vs. SUSHIL KUMAR
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Click here to view full judgement.
Hima Kohli, J. -
(1.) THE petitioner has filed the present petition praying inter alias for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari calling for the records in I.D. No. 428 of 1996 pending before the Labour Court, Delhi and for directions to the said Court to transfer the same before the Central Administrative Tribunal, New Delhi (in short 'the CAT').
(2.) BEFORE moving on to deal with the matter on merits, it is appropriate to discuss the facts of the case in brief. Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan (KVS for short), petitioner herein, is an autonomous body registered under the Societies Registration Act and is fully funded by the Government of India, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of Education, New Delhi. On 14th May, 1994 the respondent workman joined the services of the petitioner as a daily rated/casual/muster roll worker and was paid daily wages as per law. The respondent workman continued to work with the petitioner till 30th November, 1994, from which date his services were discontinued by the petitioner. Pursuant to the said termination of services, the respondent workman raised an industrial dispute seeking reinstatement and the dispute was referred to the Labour Court by the Government of N.C.T. by its order dated 19th June, 1996. Thereafter the pleadings were completed. On 17th December, 1998, while the proceedings were still pending before the Labour Court, the Central Government issued a Notification under Section 14(2) of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as ''the Act '') thereby including Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan in the Schedule at Item 34 and bringing it within the purview and jurisdiction of the CAT for adjudication of disputes in so far as the service matters are concerned, w.e.f. 1st January, 1999. An application was preferred by the petitioner before the Labour Court questioning its jurisdiction and seeking transfer of the proceedings to the CAT, which application was dismissed by the Labour Court vide order dated 21st February, 2002. Aggrieved by the said action, the petitioner preferred the present petition. By an interim order dated 21.7.2004, further proceedings before the Labour Court were stayed. The only issue sought to be raised by the petitioner by way of the present petition is that once the petitioner was brought within the purview and jurisdiction of CAT, then w.e.f. 1st January, 1999 the proceedings pending before the Labour Court automatically stand transferred to CAT by virtue of Section 29(2) of the Act and the Labour Court is divested of its jurisdiction in adjudicating the dispute raised by the respondent workman before it.
(3.) LEARNED Counsel for the petitioner submitted that on and from 1st January, 1999, no court has the jurisdiction to deal with the service matters of the staff of the petitioner and the matter which is pending before the Labour Court which pertains to service matter of the respondent workman, ought not to remain in the said court. It is the case of the petitioner that from the date of coming into force of the aforesaid notification, the provisions of Sub -section (3) of Section 14 of the Act shall apply and in view of the said section, the jurisdiction of the Labour Court is specifically barred. It was stated that in view of Section 29(2) of the Act, every suit or other proceeding pending before any court or other authority immediately before the date of establishment of a Tribunal under the Act, being a suit or proceeding, shall stand transferred on that date to such Tribunal.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.