High Court Karnataka High Court

Mr T Y Nayaz Ahmed Ias (Retd) vs The Union Ofindia on 4 April, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Mr T Y Nayaz Ahmed Ias (Retd) vs The Union Ofindia on 4 April, 2008
Author: H N Das
me HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.N. NAGAMOHAN  && 'A j  If .,..   

WRII PEIITIQN No.s464I2oo7_g_sg+1zEs)_--' " '" = --~ 'I ' ~ 'A .

Between :

Sri. T.Y.Nayaz A'nmed,'1'AS (Retd.)

Aged about 62 years _ 
Presently working as Administrative Member, - _; *
Karnataka Administrative T1ibm1a!._(1§'.AT;§ , . V "
BDA Complex, Indiranagar, " V.
Bangalore-560 038 V
R/a No.59/1, 60 Feet Road;  _ _ V_ .
RM'! 11 Stage, Kekeee CE:ew1eRene_§  " _   
Bhoopasandra Extension,  .-  A "
Berxgaiofe-566 G94, -:' ' V

(By Sri. T.Yf Nayez  3 1§ersonju V  V

And:

|---I
 '
TD
-1
-5'

'3»,  13 - e Seeretarv*--w«'V

,. _ " u
* .G'" 'er*u'a:es1tA'ef India,

    Justice
" _ 'i;egisieti've_1'2epex'i:ment, New Deihi.

V VV 2.. The Seerete§$rAto Government of India

NH1iiSI1'}!_ of Personnel, Public Grievances
' _ [And Pensions, Department of Personnel
» V  Training, North Block, New Delhi.

 The Chief Seegetery to Crexremment -f

 Kamataka, Vidhana Soudha,

Bar1gaiore- 5"G G61.  Respondents

(By St’i.Aravind Kumar, ASG for R142

Sri H. T.Narendra Prasad, I-ICGP for R3.)

OLWV

‘ order appointing the ‘pets: .i_r=. mu in’ tr tiv’6 me: u 1 o

This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the
Constitution of India with a prayer to direct the respondents to continue
the service beyond 12.6.2007 till completion of initial tenure”*~«of

-Frw 4 up a urhinla evnirgs 93 sin;-,5 the

nnmdnnhslvnnlmf
|v3}J|JU.I.IIu.I.lVl.l.I. Jul. -1 JV nuuvn vny

legally entitled to continue in service till the age of 65 years and..etCg.» ‘ 2.

This Writ Petition having been heard and reserved _:orders:.Vthisc» 0′

day, NAGAMOHAN” DAS J., pronounced the foiiowing; *’ — .. .. ‘ 2. 9
Qs__._n,12h
In this writ petition the petitionerilihas prayed fora ‘declaration to
declare Section 10A of the Arlniinistr.ativel: (Amendrnent) Act,
2006 (for short ‘the Act of 2006′) a_nd’_in the alternative

for extension of his; torture’ and pay consequential perquisites.

4. ..L.’…… -‘

Karnataka A(l.Itllii’i’..il1’i1lZiVV6._’l,–‘Ii’ii’.)l:1I’t”3i’iiVI-OI’ a period of 5 years from the date of

v .taki1igjp_c’harge of the post or.t1’_ii attaining the age of 62 years whichever is

“13! .96

-…..vy_.

3. In terms of the obaeI1rationsi–_n1atieh b:;fthe”iSupreme Court in

into force with eife.ct’7fii:;-m changes brought about

by this amendment ‘taj_theV eieeatio’n.”_of atatusflof members on par with the
serving Judges of the retirement age of the Chairman and

Members has beeii”increwaae*d “65 years to 68 years and from 62 years

it he .65 areapevctivelyl Thehost of Vice-Chairman was abolished. The

.are.4eligiible for extension for one more terms of 5 years. The

releiianti’i:t1~o\rision’i.Vt_in;cler the amended Act of 2006 for the purpose of this

_ lease is Section;_1(l–A and the same reads as under:

“”IOA. The Chairman, Vice-Chairman and Member
of a Tribunal appointed before the commencement of the
Administrative Tribunais (Amendment) Act, 2006 siiaii

.. be go.-‘ernet.! by the germs:-one ef the Act, and

kyle./\/¥

Wthe. petitioner seas

the rules made thereunder as if the Administrative

rn,,!I,___, -1, in… ___l 4. ( |_,_,|

111 ml 1 U-\m6nafI’lt’7i’li) fft, 2330 mm

0-

A

IU

,……… 3-4.. fnuna

‘ III II» we:

*-1
F

Provided that. however, such Chairman and f
Members appointed before the coming into force oflthe A V’ ‘

Administrative Tribunal (Amendment) _Ae.t,,_2006,_–“o/niv.
completion of their term or anainmentof tlxeage of A’
r ‘ixty-two ‘years, as me case mavb 1″!-whichever
fer may; if Jigilale in term of aecti.on 8 as amended
the Administrative Tribunals (Amendrnent)» Act; be V}
considered for a flesh appointme_nt intaccordance withithex
selection procedure laid it ;:suehi’:.appoinhnents
subject to the condition t’nat”tite:’totai..tern1 oiftvce’ of the

” “Pt” exceed 1 live years” at–*’—Veitha. ..f the

é
a

4. gtievanceof petitioner’ is that under the Act of 1985 the

pet_i..1-ner had a’ prospect of appointed as Vice-Chairman after

nably e”pected

variedafter hisappointnient to his disadvantage. Now under the amended

Act of “2.006.-__’flie-post of Vice-Chairman is abolished and new service

.. conditions are “introduced and the same is not made applicable to the

petitioners Therefore the petitioner is before this Court in this writ petition.

5. Heard arguments on both the side and perused the entire writ

P3P°T3-

,-.Ly\/V
C/

6. The amended Section 10-A of the Act of 2006 specifies that the

Chairman. Vice-Chairman and Member of the Tribunal appointed befo:re.p

the commencement of amended Act of 2006 shall continue to be V’ ”

by the provisions of Act of 1985 and the Rules made tltereunderiias

amended Act of 2006 had not come into force. ‘Thei”ebyé_tlle hes?

of 2006 is propective in nature. The amended is

FUV’

owl-no–em appointed under the pre¥axnendet_i he amended Act

2006 is in accordance néitit._law ‘it tcfitne as to how the
same is violative of.Artielei:ld_4_ Wises; of–IheL’Constitution of India.

7. The quai-hi$1eation’1’ixTed–._for -‘an Adminitrative Member of

the Tribunal in ‘elem: ¢rv.19sSpis§nzifei§ different from the Act of 2006. –

The amended Act of for fresh appointment implying that

the ‘existing have to compete with freh aspirants and require to g

~ appointrnent. The incumbent of a tenure post will go out of the

.on.fcsampletion of his tenme as laid down by the Supreme Court in

case of Duvgadas Purkyastha Vs. Union of India. AIR 2002 so 2639.

0 V l . , __:Therefore the claim of the petitioner for extension is liable to be rejected.

I ‘/,V.\_

8. During the pendency of this writ petition the petitioner retired

from service on attaining the age of superarmuation of 62 years. The-,T

respondents in the statement of objections state that the petitioner_is. ‘” ~

apply for the upaaded post in case he fitlfills the elim’bility

down in the amended Act. Therefore the queétionr of

p.n1t’..loner as _._ember -1′ the Tribunal do not arise; «Hewever. fit: petitioder ‘ ~ ., ‘

rejected.

LRS.