Employees may not be able to challenge CAT judgement in SC

Employees may not be able to challenge CAT judgement in SC

NEW DELHI: Bad news is in store for government employees contesting matters relating to their service conditions in the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) as they may not be able to challenge the judgement in the Supreme Court.

Government employees not satisfied with CAT orders on their service matters will continue to appeal in High Courts as government's plan to enable them approach the apex court directly has received a thumbs down from the top law officer.

Recently, the Department of Personnel had asked the Law Ministry whether the present system of CAT orders being challenged in High Courts be changed to fast track disposal of cases of government employees relating to their service conditions and employment rules.

The Law Ministry referred the matter to Attorney General Ghoolam Vahanvati who opined against the move saying a 1997 Supreme Court judgement on the issue should continued to be followed.

"As of now, the buck stops here (on the issue)," Law Minister M Veerappa Moily told PTI when asked to comment on Vahanvati's opinion.

He said his ministry was trying to find a solution. "But I would not like to add anything more to it," he added.

When the CAT was established in 1985 by an Act of Parliament, its rules clearly stated that its judgements on service related matters of state and central government employees can only be challenged in the apex court.

While the same rules is in operation even today, a 1997 Supreme Court ruling held that judicial review is the basic feature of the Constitution and a High Court's power on judicial review cannot be taken away.

After the judgement, appeals against CAT rulings were entertained in High Courts.

"The Armed Forces Tribunal Act has been borrowed from CAT. Appeals against Tribunal's orders can only be challenged in the Supreme Court. But in CAT's case, it has become a three tier system...the entire purpose of CAT has been defeated," said a CAT functionary.

He said while CAT usually disposes off a case in six months, appeal in High Court often takes years.

"They pay Rs 50 as fee to move CAT, but they have to pay thousands of rupees in High Court...if the matter reaches Supreme Court, the time and cost involved is massive," he said.

Source: Economic Times

Read more...

Judgement of the High Court of Delhi in W.P.(C) No.15828/2006 National Federation of Blind Vs. DOl & Ors.

No.36012/23/2009- Estt(Res)

Government of India

Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions

Department of Personnel & Training
North Block

NewDelhi, the 4th May,2009.

OFFICE MEMORANDUM

Subject:- Judgement of the High Court of Delhi in W.P.(C) No.15828/2006 National Federation of Blind Vs. DOl & Ors. - reg.

The Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in W.P. (C) No.15828/2006 in the matter of National Federation of the Blind Vs. DOl & Ors. has held that reservation forpersons with disabilities should be computed on the basis of total strength of cadre i.e. both identified as well as unidentified posts and issued following directions :-
"i. We direct the respondents to constitute a committee consisting of the Chief Commissioner for Disabilities (Chairman), Joint Secretary, Department of Personnel and Training, Joint Secretary, Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, Joint Secretary, Department of Public Enterprises, and Secretary, Staff Selection Commission to do the following acts in terms of this order:

(a) To solicit information with regard to recruitments made by departments/public sector undertakings/government companies from the date when the Disabilities Act came into force in 1996 and to work out backlog of vacancies for the disabled on the total cadre strength in different establishments within one month from the date of this order.

(b) To undertake special recruitment drive by organising centralised recruitment against backlog so worked out so as to fill up the vacancies by utilising at least 50% of the vacancies available with the respective establishments for this purpose only.

(c) To organise further special recruitment drive as required so as to fill up the remaining backlog of vacancies by 315t December, 2010.

ii. Respondent No.1 will issue an appropriate order modifying the OM dated 29.12.2005 and the subsequent OMs consistent with this Court's order.

iii. The respondent No. 1 shall issue instructions to all the departments/public sector undertakings/government companies declaring that the non observance of the scheme of reservation for persons with disabilities should be considered as an act of non- obedience and the Nodal Officer in departments/public sector undertakings/government companies responsible for the proper strict implementation of reservation for person with disabilities to be departmentally proceeded against for his default.

iv. The Respondent No. 1 is further directed to issue instructions to all the departments/public sector undertakings/government companies as well as recruiting agencies not to undertake recruitment for any department/public sector undertaking/ government company unless the department/public sector undertaking/government company makes provisions for reservation for persons with disabilities in terms of the order of this Court and a clearance is granted by the Committee headed by the Chief Commissioner for Disabilities.

v. The Committee headed by the Chief Commissioner for Disabilities shall submit a status report on implementation for the above directions of this Court within three months from the date of this order."
2. The Union of India has filed an SLP No.7541/2009 in the Supreme Court inthe matter and has also filed an Interim Application for staying the operation ofthe order of the Hon'ble High Court. Meanwhile the National Federation of theBlind has filed a Contempt Case in the matter. The Hon'ble High Court has desired that since the Hon'ble Supreme Court has not stayed the operation of the order, it should be implemented. Without prejudice to the outcome of the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the undersigned is directed to say that all the establishments may implement the order of the Hon 'ble High Court of Delhi. It may be pointed out that this Department (Respondent No.1), without prejudice to the outcome of the order of the Hon 'ble Supreme Court, has already constituted a Committee on 23.3.2009 to workout the backlog on the basis of the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court and is in the process of modifying the OM No. 36035/3/2004-Estt.(Res.) dated 29.12.2005 regarding reservation for persons with disabilities.

3. All the Ministries/Departments etc. are requested to bring the contents of this OM to the notice of all concerned.

(K.G. Verma)
Director

Read more...