HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT JAMMU. SWP No. 676 OF 2009 AND SWP No. 677 OF 2009 1)Girdhari Lal and ors 2) Naresh Bharti and ors Petitioners Union of India and ors Respondent !Mr. Navneet Dubey, Advocate ^Mr. V.K.Magoo, Advocate. MR. JUSTICE J. P. SINGH, JUDGE. Date: 20.05.2010 :J U D G M E N T :
Learned counsel for the parties were heard on the
maintainability of these Writ Petitions in this Court in view of the
applicability of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 to Bharat
Sanchar Nigam Limited, the petitioners employer, vide S.O.(E)
dated the 31st October, 2008 issued by Government of India,
Ministry of Personnel Public Grievances and Pensions
(Department of Personnel and Training).
Petitioners have filed these Writ Petitions seeking, inter
alia, fixation of their seniority besides promotion to the post of
STS Group-A in the Cadre of STS- Group Service.
Learned counsel for Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited has
opposed the maintainability of the petitioners Writ Petitions on
the ground that, with the issuance of Government of India,
Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pension
(Department of Personnel and Trainings) Notification S.O.(E)
dated the 31st October, 2008 applying the provisions of the
Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 to the Bharat Sanchar Nigam
Limited, this Court may not have jurisdiction to entertain the Writ
Petitions because the dispute raised in these Writ Petitions was
cognizable by the Central Administrative Tribunal.
Petitioners learned counsel says that the Administrative
Tribunals Act, 1985 was not applicable to the employees of the
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited in view of the exception
appearing in Section 14(3)(b) of the Administrative Tribunals
Act, 1985 and these Writ Petitions were, thus, maintainable in
this Court notwithstanding the issuance of Notification S.O.(E) of
October 31, 2008 .
Per contra, Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limiteds learned
counsel submitted that Section 14(1)(b)(iii) referred to in Section
14(3)(b) would have no application to the employees of the
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited, in that, the word and appearing
before the expression pertaining to the service of such member
in Section 14(1)(b)(iii), relied upon by the petitioners counsel,
would not be read disjunctively, in that, such a course was
neither countenanced by the law makers nor was such
interpretation of the above referred provision, otherwise
permissible and in this view of the matter, the provisions of the
Administrative Tribunals Act, according to the learned counsel,
would apply to the Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited.
Learned counsel for the parties were not, however, at
variance that in the event of the applicability of the Act to Bharat
Sanchar Nigam Limited, the dispute raised in both Writ Petitions
would be cognizable by the Central Administrative Tribunal.
I have considered the submissions of learned counsel for
the parties and gone through the provisions of Section 14(1) and
(3) of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985.
A plain reading of Section 14(1)(b)(iii), on which the
petitioners learned counsel lays great stress, demonstrates that
word and appearing in clause (iii) aforementioned is specifically
intended to apply to those Civilians, who were appointed to any
defence services or a post connected with defence, be they
under the control of the Government of India or any corporation
or society owned or controlled by the Government.
This clause, by no stretch of reasoning, can be said to
apply to the members of the Corporation for which the
Parliament, in its wisdom, has made specific provision under
Section 14(3) of the Act vesting the Central Administrative
Tribunals with all the jurisdiction, powers and authority
exercisable immediately before the notified date by all Courts
except the Supreme Court, in relation to recruitment and other
matters concerning recruitment, to any service or post in
connection with the affairs of such local or other authority or
corporation or society and all service matters concerning a
person appointed to any service or post in connection with the
affairs of such local or other authority or corporation or society
and pertaining to the service or such person in connection with
such affairs.
I, therefore, do not find any merit in the petitioners learned
counsels submission that the exception indicated in Section
14(3)(b) of the Administrative Tribunals Act,1985 was attracted
in case of the employees of the Corporation and in this view of
the matter, it is held that after coming into force of S.O.(E) dated
the 31st October, 2008 the provisions of Section 14(3) of the
Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 would apply to Bharat
Sanchar Nigam Limited in relation to the disputes mentioned in
Section 14(3)(a) &(b) of the Act.
For all what has been said above, the dispute raised by
the petitioners in both the Writ Petitions being cognizable by the
Central Administrative Tribunal constituted under the provisions
of The Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, this Court would have
no jurisdiction to entertain the petitioners Writ Petitions.
These Writ Petitions are, accordingly, dismissed as nonmaintainable,
leaving the petitioners free to approach the
Central Administrative Tribunal.
(J. P. Singh)
Judge
JAMMU
20.05.2010
Vinod.
