Shiv Kumar Sharma, J. - (1.) The petitioner in this writ petition impugns the order of the Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal (for short 'RCSAT') whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioner has been dismissed on the ground that there was no impugned written order against the petitioner. Core question therefore emerges for consideration is as to whether appeal before the RCSAT is maintainable without the impugned written order?
(2.) A radical change was made in the Constitutional law relating to the services by the 42nd Constitution Amendment Act, 1976, which inserted into the Constitution Article 323-A to take out the adjudication of disputes relating to the recruitment and conditions of service of the public services of the to Union and of the States from the hands of the civil courts and the High Courts and to place it before an Administrative Tribunal for the Union or of a State (as the case may be). Their Lordships of the Supreme Court in Vatticherukuru Village Panchayat v. Nori V. Deekshithulul 1991 Supp. (2) SCC 228 indicated in pare 18 thus:- "The Constitution intends to herald an eglitarian social order by implementing the goals of socio-economic justice set down in the preamble of the Constitution. In that regard the Constitution created positive duties on the state in Part IV towards individuals. The Parliament and the State legislatures made diverse laws to restructure the social order; created rights in favour of the citizens; conferred power and jurisdiction on the hierarchy of tribunals or the authorities constituted thereunder and gave finality to their orders or decisions and divested the jurisdiction of the established civil courts expressly or by necessary implication We have to consider, when questioned, why the legislature made this departure. The reason is obvious. The tradition bound Civil Courts gripped with rules of pleading and strict rules of evidence and tardy trial, four tier appeals, endless revisions and reviews under CPC are not suited to the needed expeditious dispensation. The adjudicatory system provided in the new forum is cheap and rapid. The procedure before the tribunal is simple and not hide-bound by the intricate procedure of pleadings, trial, admissibility of the evidence and proof of facts according to law. Therefore, there is abundant flexibility in the discharge of the function with greater expedition and inexpensiveness." (Underlining is mine).
(3.) In J.B. Chopra v. Union of India (1987) 1 SCC 422 the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that the Administrative Tribunal had the necessary jurisdiction, power and authority to adjudicate upon all disputes relating to service matters including the power to deal with all questions pertaining to the constitutional validity or otherwise of such laws as offending Articles 14 and 16(1) of the Constitution.;