K. S. LODHA, J. - (1.) SHRI D. S. Mehta, the appellant, who is Dy. S. P. in the C. R. P. F. , had challenged the order dated 7. 8. 85, Ex. 13 on the record, by which his junior had been promoted superseding him, by filing a writ petition before this Court. The learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition by order dated 9. 7. 86 holding that the petitioner-appellant should approach the Central Administrative Tribunal. This order has been challenged by the petitioner appellant in this appeal.
(2.) WE have heard the learned counsel for the parties. Although, the matter had come up for hearing of the stay application No. 2/89, but the learned counsel for the parties agreed that the appeal itself may be heard and disposed of at this stage because it involves a small question of law only. Sec. 2 of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985 provides exceptions saying that the provision of this Act shall not apply to any member of the naval, military or air forces or of any other armed forces of the Union. By judgment in Akhilesh Prasad Vs. Union Territory of Mizoram (1), their Lordships of the Supreme Court, have held that Central Reserve Police Force falls within the expression 'armed Force of the Union, under Sec. 197 (2), Cr. P. C. Sec. 3 (1) of the Central Reserve Police Force Act, 1949 and Constitution of India Schedule VII List I, Entry 2. In view of the decision of their Lordship in Akhilesh Prasad's case (Supra) there is no doubt that a member of the C. R. P. F. cannot approach the Administrative Tribunal and, therefore, the learned single Judge was not right in holding that the petitioner appellant has an alternative remedy. In these circumstances, that order of the learned single Judge cannot be maintained. We, therefore, allow this appeal and set aside the order of the learned single Judge dated 9. 7. 86. The writ petition shall come up for admission now.
(3.) MR. J,p. Joshi accepts notice of the writ petition and wants some time to file reply to the same. The writ petition, thus, stands admitted and shall be listed before the regular Bench hearing writ petitions. Four weeks time islallowed to MR. Joshi to file reply. .;