- (1.) The question in these revision applications is as to whether the order passed by the Public Services Tribunal quashing the termination order of the employee and declaring that he will continue to remain in service and will be entitled to salary and other allowances etc. can be executable by Civil Court or it is pure and simple declaratory decree which cannot be executed and the order passed by the Tribunal will remain only on paper.
(2.) Under the U.P. Public Services (Tribunals) Act, 1976 (hereinafter known as the Act), the Tribunal is to adjudicate upon matters in respect of employees of the State. Section 5 of the Act provides powers and procedure of the Tribunal. Sub-section (6) and (7) of Section 5 of the Act, which are relevant, read as follows: (6). A declaration made by the Tribunal shall be binding on the claimant and his employer as well as on any other public servant who has, in respect of any claim affecting his interest adversely, been given an opportunity of making a representation against it, and shall have the same effect as a declaration made by a court of law. (7). Where the Tribunal makes an order other than a declaration referred to in Sub-section remains uncomplied with for a period of three months from the date of such order, the Tribunal may, on the application of the party in whose favour the order stands, issue a certificate for recovery of the amount awarded or, as the case may be, for any other relief granted by the Tribunal. Any party, in whose favour such certificate is issued, may apply to the principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction in Uttar Pradesh within the local limits of whose jurisdiction the employee is for the time being serving, or, as the case may be, last served such employer, for execution of the order of the Tribunal, and such Court shall thereupon execute the certificate or cause the same to be executed in the same manner and by the same procedure as if it were a decree for like relief passed by itself in a suit.
(3.) Once a Government servant or employee or an employee of a Statutory Corporation gets appointment he gets a particular status and the legal position is, more or less, that of a contract. In case he is deprived of his status and a declaration is given that he is entitled to same status which he has been deprived and he is placed back in the position from where he was displaced, he will continue to be entitled to hold the same status, privileges, rights and obligations attached to the same notwithstanding the intervening circumstances with which he was deprived. A declaration granted by the Tribunal under Section 5 Sub-section (6) shall be binding on the claimant and the employer as well as any other public servant once a declaration made by the Tribunal has been made of binding effects one who is bound by it has to give effect to the same, and the same cannot be ignored by an employer or any other authority and the employer is bound to respect the same and cannot raise any objection to it and if the matter has gone to a Court of law obviously it will give recognition to the same. In this connection observations made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Bihar v. Rani Sonabati Kumari may be made: Before concluding, we consider it proper to draw attention to one aspect of the case. It is the essence of the rule of law that every authority within the State including the Executive Government should consider itself bound by and obey the Law. It is fundamental to the system of policy that India has adopted and which is embodied in the Constitution that the Courts of the land are vested with the powers of interpreting the law and of applying it to the facts of the cases which are properly brought before them. If any party to the proceedings considers that any Court has committed any error, in the understanding of the law or in its application, resort must be had to such a review or appeals as the law provides. When once an order has been passed which the Court has jurisdiction to pass, it is the duty of all persons bound by it to obey the order so long as it stands, and it would tend to the subversion or orderly administration and civil Government, if parties could disobey orders with impunity. If such is the position as regards private parties, the duty to obey is all the more imperative in the case of Government authorities otherwise there would be a conflict between one branch of the State policy, viz. the executive and another branch-the Judicial. If disobedience could go unchecked, it would result in orders of Courts ceasing to have any meaning and judicial power it self becoming mockery. When the State Government obeys a law, or gives effect to an order of a Court passed against it, it is not doing anything which detracts from its dignity but rather, invests the law and the Court with the dignity which are their due, which enhances the prestige of the executive Government itself, in a democratic setup.;