Friends,
I present the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court Order delivered today in a Writ Petition filed by me, which also deals with certain important aspects of Hon'ble CAT and seem relevant for all the other Tribunals and subordinate Courts, particularly in the way to maintain the "majesty of law" as the Hon'ble Court said. It might be of use to many others in different other contexts as well
Amitabh Thakur
Lucknow
# 094155-34526--
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 27
Case :- SERVICE BENCH No. - 717 of 2013
Petitioner :- Amitabh Thakur
Respondent :- R.M.Srivastava & Ors.
Petitioner Counsel :- Asok Pande,Rohit Tripathi
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.
?Court No. - 27
Case :- SERVICE BENCH No. - 717 of 2013
Petitioner :- Amitabh Thakur
Respondent :- R.M.Srivastava & Ors.
Petitioner Counsel :- Asok Pande,Rohit Tripathi
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Devi Prasad Singh,J.
Hon'ble Ashok Pal Singh,J.
Heard Sri Ashok Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner.
It appears that because of inaction on the part of the State Government to appoint the Presenting Officer in the Central Administrative Tribunal, the work is suffering.
From the perusal of record, it appears that the Tribunal has granted time for production of record and to receive instruction but in absence of Presenting Officer, the State Government could not produce record. When the Tribunal proceeded ahead to take decision, at the last moment, appearance has been put on behalf of State Government. Sri Ashok Pandey submits that for years, the State Government has not appointed regular Presenting Officer.
Chief Secretary/Principal Secretary is directed to look into the matter and apprise the Court as to what action has been taken to appoint the Presenting Officer. We further take note of the fact that in case the State Government does not produce record or there is inaction on the part of the State Government, then why the Tribunal has not exercised contempt jurisdiction in pursuance of the provisions contained in the relevant Act. The Tribunal should be firm to maintain the majesty of law while dealing with any person whosoever he or she may be, in pursuance of statutory and mandatory provisions contained in the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985.
As prayed by the learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel, put up on 14.5.2013 to enable her to receive instruction in the matter.
The name of opposite party No.2 and 3 shall be deleted from the array of parties during the course of the day, by the petitioner.
Order Date :- 10.5.2013
Order Date :- 10.5.2013
__._,_.___
| Reply via web post | Reply to sender | Reply to group | Start a New Topic | Messages in this topic (1) |
.
__,_._,___
No comments:
Post a Comment