Uttarakhand HC asserts all CAT benches are equal, principal bench too

The high court set aside the CAT principal bench order related to transfer of a plea being heard in its Nainital bench to Delhi, saying the principal bench cannot be permitted to be usurper of power.

All benches of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) are equal and its principal bench cannot be allowed to robe itself with a superior quality, the Uttarakhand High Court has said.

The tribunal adjudicates service matters of central government employees.

The high court also set aside the CAT principal bench order related to transfer of a plea being heard in its Nainital bench to Delhi, saying the the principal bench cannot be permitted to be usurper of power.

Hearing the plea filed by Sanjiv Chaturvedi, an Indian Forest Service Officer, the high court in its order said before a case is transferred from one bench to another, or from one court to another, certain criteria for transferring the case have to be kept in mind.

Chaturvedi, who is posted in Haldwani, had in February last year filed an application with the tribunal's bench here challenging the civil servants' empanelment process.

The Centre, in October 2020, had sought transfer of the case from the Nainital circuit bench to the tribunal's principal bench in New Delhi, saying since the decision with regard to a policy decision of the central government would have nationwide repercussions, therefore, only the principal bench is a suitable bench for deciding the validity of the policy decision among other reasoning.

The CAT's principal bench through its order dated December 4, 2020 had allowed the Centre's plea for transfer of the case to Delhi.

Aggrieved over the tribunal's order, Chaturvedi had moved the high court.

The court is of the opinion that the reasoning contained in the CAT's order dated is legally unsustainable and set aside it while allowing Chaturvedi's petition, according to the order issued by Chief Justice Raghvendra Singh Chauhan and Justice N S Dhanik, on October 23.

Citing a Supreme Court verdict, the high court said a challenge to a policy decision can equally be invoked before any bench of the CAT.

The high court noted that Chaturvedi's case was transferred ostensibly, on the ground that the matter of this nature would have their own impact on the very functioning of the central government.

In case Parliament in its wisdom were of the opinion that issues have nationwide repercussion, or having great impact on the functioning of the central government, should be consigned to the principal bench, then a necessary provision would have been enacted by Parliament, it said, referring to the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985.

However, since Parliament has treated all the benches of the CAT as alike, even cases of nationwide repercussion, or having great impact on the functioning of the central government can, indeed, be decided by other benches of CAT. Such issues need not be relegated to the principal bench, the order said.

Since all the benches, including the principal bench, are equal, such a mis-impression cannot be made in the mind of the litigant, it said.

For, the principal bench cannot be allowed to robe itself with a superior authority which was never given to it by the Act. After all, the principal bench cannot be permitted to be usurper of the power, the order said.

The high court said, while considering the prayers of the Union of India to transfer the case from Nainital circuit bench to the principal bench, New Delhi, the tribunal should have considered the convenience of both the parties.

A bare perusal of the impugned order clearly reveals that the tribunal has failed to consider the hardship caused to the petitioner if the case were to be transferred from Nainital circuit bench to New Delhi, it said.

Travelling from Haldwani to New Delhi would also adversely affect his (Chaturvedi) physical health, and psychological makeup. For, he will continue to be under a mental tension while having to travel from Haldwani to New Delhi, the order said.

Thus, the balance of convenience is in favour of the petitioner if the case should be heard by the Nainital circuit bench, and should be decided by it, it said.

Chaturvedi, who is working as the chief conservator of forest at Haldwani, has challenged the 360 degree appraisal system for joint secretary and above level officers and recruitment of private sector specialists to central government posts through the lateral entry mode.