Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Balram Pachauri & Others vs Union Of India & Others on 16 September, 2011
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH NEW DELHI P.T. No.171/2011 This the 16th day of September, 2011 HONBLE SHRI JUSTICE V. K. BALI, CHAIRMAN Balram Pachauri & others Applicants ( By Shri U. Srivastava, Advocate ) Versus Union of India & others Respondents ( By Shri Shailendra Tiwary, Advocate ) O R D E R
The applicants have filed Original Application questioning the validity and propriety of order dated 17.2.2011 followed by reminders dated 14.3.2011 and 21.3.2011, whereby the respondents have asked the applicants, who had been working on the post of Storeman since long, to submit their willingness for adjustment in their original cadre post, namely, Trackman/Khalasi from where they were promoted to the post of Storemen. Accompanying the OA is a misc. application under Section 25 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 seeking retention of the OA in the Principal Bench of the Tribunal, as the jurisdiction to entertain and try the same would otherwise be with the Allahabad Bench. In the application aforesaid, it is stated that the applicants are residing at Etawah (UP) which is situated at about 150 kms. from Delhi, whereas the distance between Etawah and Allahabad would be about 400 kms. It is pleaded that it would be expensive and time consuming for the applicants to file OA in the Allahabad Bench, and that they would have to incur far more expenses and there would also be delay in finalization of their case.
2. Pursuant to notice issued by this Tribunal, the respondents have entered appearance. Even though no reply has been filed, the matter has been opposed on the ground that once the jurisdiction to entertain and try the OA is with the Allahabad Bench, this Tribunal may dismiss the application for retention thereof in the Principal Bench. The twin object of the Act of 1985 is to provide inexpensive and speedy remedy to Government employees in the matter of redressal of grievances pertaining to their service conditions. Surely, it is because of the fact that the jurisdiction is with the Allahabad Bench that the present application has been filed. If the grounds exist to retain the OA in the Principal Bench, which do exist in the present case, the same needs to be retained. Ordered accordingly.
3. The application seeking retention is allowed.
( V. K. Bali ) Chairman /as/