Ashok Bhushan, J. - (1.) HEARD Sri D.B. Kauser, the applicant appearing in person and Sri Pankaj Srivastava, holding brief of Sri Satish Chaturvedi, for the respondents.
(2.) BY this application, the applicant (hereinafter referred to as the petitioner) has prayed for review of the judgment and order dated 1st February, 2001 by which judgment after hearing the petitioner in person, the writ petition filed by him was dismissed. Brief facts necessary for appreciating the contentions raised in the review application are; the petitioner was appointed on 14th October, 1958 in the office of Accountant General, U.P., Allahabad. By an order/scheme dated 19th December, 1983, the Comptroller and Auditor General of India introduced a scheme for restructuring the Indian Audit and Accounts Department into two separate wings, namely, "Accounts and Entitlement" and "Audit". Under the scheme the pay scales were proposed. The employees working in the office of the Accountant General were asked to submit their option by 31st June, 1984 opting Accounts Wing for which certain higher pay scales were proposed. The petitioner filed a writ petition being Writ Petition No. 840 -A of 1984 challenging the bifurcation scheme dated 19th December, 1983 on the principal submission that Comptroller and Auditor General of India has no jurisdiction to issue any order affecting service conditions of the employees working in the office of Accountant General. It was submitted that service condition can be affected only by rules framed by the President of India in consultation with the Comptroller and Auditor General of India in accordance with Article 148 Sub -clause (5) of the Constitution of India. Large number of writ petitions were filed by different employees which all were clubbed together. Writ Petition No. 2981 of 1984 filed by 365 petitioners was treated to be leading writ petition. Writ Petition No. 840 -A of 1984 filed by the petitioner was also clubbed along with Writ Petition No. 2981 of 1984 and was decided by common judgment of the Division Bench of this Court dated 20th September, 1985. The Division Bench of this Court held that impugned order (manual) introducing the scheme of restructuring the cadre in Indian Audits and Accounts Department is not liable to be struck down. All the writ petitions were dismissed. The petitioner did not choose to file any special leave petition before the Apex Court against the said Division Bench judgment. However, certain other employees filed civil appeal before the Apex Court being Civil Appeal No. 2674 of 1986 which was disposed of by the Apex Court vide its judgment and order dated 5th August, 1986 making certain clarificatory modifications. The petitioner had not given any option for Audit Wing and was continued in the office of the Account and Entitlement. The petitioner filed a claim petition before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Additional Bench, Allahabad being Application No. 639 of 1993 claiming promotional pay scale of Rs. 425 -800 with benefit of pay fixation under F.R. 22 -C retrospectively with effect from 1st March, 1984 allocating him suo moto to Audit Wing. The Central Administrative Tribunal vide its judgment and order dated 6th May, 1999 dismissed the claim petition relying on the Division Bench judgment of this Court in Writ Petition No. 2981 of 1984 filed by 365 employees as well as Writ Petition No. 840 -A of 1984 filed by the petitioner himself.
(3.) THE petitioner filed Writ Petition No. 34972 of 1999 challenging the order of Tribunal. The said writ petition has been dismissed by the Division Bench vide judgment and order dated 1st February, 2001. The petitioner attained the age of superannuation in the year 1993. This review application has been filed to review the said judgment. In the review application, the petitioner has prayed for following relief: a) to declare the judgment dated 20th September, 1985 in Sudhish Chandra v. C. & AG, supra, as a nullity owing to massive fraud resorted to by Respondents in the earlier proceedings in this Hon'ble Court & subsequently confessed in unmistakable terms before the Apex Court in Special Leave (Civil) No. 6322 of 1990; b) to declare that the Comptroller & Auditor General of India stands bereft of any authority under Article 148(5) of the Constitution or under any other statutory rule either to prescribe; or alter; or modify the conditions of service (including matters relating to seniority & promotion) of persons serving in the Indian Audit & Accounts Department in the context of 5 -Judge Constitution Bench pronouncement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India dated 21st April, 1971 in Gurumoorthy's case, supra, which is binding on this Hon'ble Court under Article 141 of the Constitution of India; c) to declare that the Comptroller & Auditor General of India - having had no locus standi to withdraw the ''WEIGHTAGE' in seniority as afforded to SAS qualified personnel of the Indian Audit Department by the Governor General -in -Council vide orders contained in Circular No. 1757 -E/1129 dated 18th April, 1921 - could not proclaim himself as the author of that Circular & crown himself with power to prescribe or modify the conditions of service of persons serving in the Indian Audit & Accounts Department through administrative orders/ instructions when that was not available to him under Government of India Acts 1919 and 1935; d) to set -aside the judgment dated 1st February, 2001 in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 34972 of 1999 which may kindly be re -heard on merits in the interest of doing complete justice.;