ABDUL QAYOOM CHALKOO Vs. UNION TERRITORY OF JK
LAWS(J&K)-2020-12-93
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
Decided on December 31,2020

Abdul Qayoom Chalkoo Appellant
VERSUS
Union Territory Of Jk Respondents




JUDGEMENT

PER MAGREY; J - (1.)By this appeal, the appellant/Writ petitioner has assailed the validity of judgment dated 8th of September, 2020, whereby the review petition preferred by the appellant against the judgment and order dated 17 th of June, 2020 passed by the learned Single Judge in WP(C) No.862/2020; thereby transferring the said service petition, filed by the appellant, to the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jammu Bench stands dismissed.
(2.)The precise material facts leading to the filing of this appeal are that the appellant filed a Writ petition, being WP(C) No.862/2020; CM No.1875/2020, before the learned Single Judge. The learned Single Judge, in terms of order dated 17th of June, 2020, transferred the said Writ petition for adjudication to the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jammu Bench. Thereafter, the appellant assailed the order dated 17th of June, 2020 before this Court in an appeal, registered as LPA No.86/2020; 2821/2020, wherein this Court, by virtue of order dated 14th of August, 2020, permitted the appellant to withdraw the appeal and file a review petition before the learned Single Judge. Accordingly, the appellant filed the review petition before the learned Single Judge against the aforesaid order dated 17th of June, 2020, being RP No.20/2020, inter alia, stating therein as under:
"i. That the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir has been constitutionally structured on the pattern of Union Territory of National Capital of Delhi with its own separate legislature and, as such, the services allocated to Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir are under the legislative and executive domain as well as administrative control of the union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir and, thus, Central Administrative Tribunal, Jammu Bench, has no jurisdiction, power or authority under Section 14 of the Administrative Tribunals Act to entertain, hear and decide the matters in respect of services rendered in connection with the affairs of Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir.

ii. That Section 28 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, where- under jurisdiction of the Writ Court in regard to the matters over which jurisdiction is vested in the Central Administrative Tribunal under Section 14, stands struck down as unconstitutional by the Supreme Court of India in L. Chandra Kumar's case reported in AIR 1997 SC 1125 iii. That the jurisdiction of the Writ Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is not ousted and continues to be available for being availed even in case where the alternate remedy is not adequate or efficacious. Since no Bench is available at Srinagar, therefore, in view of the statement made by the Supreme Court of India in Rojer Mathew's case (Civil Appeal No.8588/2019 decided on 13.11.2019), the remedy of approaching the Central Administrative Tribunal for the employees residing in Kashmir Province cannot be said to be efficacious."

The learned Single, after hearing the counsel for the appellant, in terms of judgment dated 8th of September, 2020, dismissed the review petition of the appellant by observing that it has been unable to persuade itself to concur with the contentions raised by the petitioner/ appellant herein and that it did not find any ground to review the order passed on 17 th of June, 2020, whereby the petition of the petitioner/ appellant herein stands transferred to the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jammu Bench. Faced with this position, the appellant has preferred the instant appeal before this Court assailing the order dated 8th of September, 2020 passed by the learned Single Judge in Review Petition No.20/2020.

(3.)In terms of order dated 10th of November, 2020, when this appeal came up for consideration before this Court, the Court arrayed the Union of India, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pension, through its Secretary, New Delhi as well as the Central Administrative Tribunal, New Delhi, through its Chairman as party respondents in the appeal. Besides, on the same date, Mr Tahir Majid Shamsi, the learned Assistant Solicitor General of India, who had waived notice on behalf of the newly impleaded respondents, was directed to furnish the following information to the Court:
i. Number of cases received by the Jammu Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal from this Court with effect from its establishment till filing of the reply;

ii. Number of fresh institutions;

iii. Number of cases received from the High Court which have been finally disposed of by the Jammu Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal;

iv. The time that is taken by the Tribunal for processing and listing of fresh cases; whether the cases filed on a given day are listed on the same day or on the day following the day of its filing or some other future date; The Tribunal shall indicate the procedure adopted by it in listing and considering the fresh cases;

v. Whether the order passed by the Tribunal, final or interim, are made available to the parties or are uploaded on its official website on the same day or the day following its pronouncement or on some other future date; the procedure, if any, adopted by the Tribunal in this regard;

vi. How many Benches of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jammu, are available and sit on a given day to take up the pending and the fresh cases;

vii. What is the roadmap prepared by the Tribunal to list the pending matters which have been transferred from this Court to the Central Administrative Tribunal Bench;

viii. How many pending/ fresh cases are listed on the average in a day and how many are actually taken up for orders."

Thereafter, the matter was again listed on 24 th of December, 2020, on which date, it was observed that the requisitioned information stands filed on behalf of the Deputy Registrar, Central Administrative Tribunal, Jammu Bench, copy whereof furnished to the learned Senior Counsel representing the appellant on 17th of December, 2020, however, since the copy of the Counter Affidavit filed on behalf of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi, on 23rd of December, 2020, was not provided to the learned Senior Counsel, this Court, while directing Mr Shamsi, learned Assistant Solicitor General of India to provide a copy of the Counter Affidavit to the learned Senior Counsel, adjourned the matter to 29th of December, 2020. Subsequently, on 29th of December, 2020, the matter was taken up, the parties heard and judgment reserved.

;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.