Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Central Administrative Tribunal - Allahabad

Ram Kailash vs Union Of India on 13 September, 2018

                                                                Reserved

          CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, ALLAHABAD
                     BENCH, ALLAHABAD

               (This the 13th Day of September 2018)

         Hon'ble Mr. Rakesh Sagar Jain, Member (Judicial)
       Hon'ble Mr. Mohd. Jamshed, Member (Administrative)

                Original Application No.330/637/2010
              (U/S 19, Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985)

Ram Kailash S/o Sri Daya Ram R/o Village Badi Didi Kala Post- Didi Khurd,
District - Bhind (Madhya Pradesh).
                                                 ................ Applicant
By Advocate:            Shri K.K. Mishra

                                 Versus

1.   Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Water Resources,
     New Delhi.

2.   Executive Engineer, Central Water Commission, Lower Yamuna
     Mandal, Awas Vikas Colony, Sikandara Sector- 12 Quarter No.404 -
     409 near Central Jail, Agra.

3.   The Superintending engineer, Jal Vigyaniya Prakashan Parimandal,
     C-130 Sector -19 Noida. Present District - Gautam Budh Nagar.

                                            ..... ............. Respondents
By Advocate:      Shri N.P. Shukla
                              Along with

               Original Application No.330/1309/2010

Vivek Raghubanshi S/o Har Nath Singh, R/o Village Aanantpur, Post
Pachavali, Tehsil Kolaras, District - Shivpuri (M.P.)
                                                 ................ Applicant
By Advocate:            Shri K.K. Mishra

                                 Versus

1.   The Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Water
     Resources, New Delhi.

2.   Executive Engineer, Central Water Commission, Lower Yamuna
     Mandal, Awas Vikas Colony, Sikandara Sector- 12 Quarter No.404 -
     409 near Central Jail, Agra.
                                                           Page No. 2


3.   The Superintending engineer, Jal Vigyaniya Prakashan Parimandal,
     C-130 Sector -19 Noida. Present District - Gautam Budh Nagar.

                                            ..... ............. Respondents
By Advocate:     Shri Avnish Tripathi


                              Along with

               Original Application No.330/623/2010

Ashok Kumar S/o Mewa Ram R/o Village and Post Akoda, District - Bhind
(Madhya Pradesh).
                                                 ................ Applicant
By Advocate:           Shri K.K. Mishra

                                Versus

1.   The Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Water
     Resources, New Delhi.

2.   Executive Engineer, Central Water Commission, Lower Yamuna
     Mandal, Awas Vikas Colony, Sikandara Sector- 12 Quarter No.404 -
     409 near Central Jail, Agra.

3.   The Superintending engineer, Jal Vigyaniya Prakashan Parimandal,
     C-130 Sector -19 Noida. Present District - Gautam Budh Nagar.

                                            ..... ............. Respondents
By Advocate:     Shri N.P. Shukla

                             Along With

               Original Application No.330/814/2014

1.   Veer Singh son of Shri Malkhan Singh, Resident of Village and Post
     Nanora, District Hamirpur (new District Mahoba).

2.   Madan Pal son of Mata Deen, Resident of Village Balchaur, Post
     Nanaura District Hamirpur, (New District Mahoba).

3.   Jagdish Chand son of Sri Buddhu, resident of Village Basaura, Post
     Sijhari District, Hamirpur (new District Mahoba).

4.   Vijay Bahadur son of Sri Baldev Prasad, resident of Village and Post
     Bilkhi, District Hamirpur (new District Majoba).
                                                ................ Applicants
By Advocate:           Shri K.K. Mishra

                                Versus
                                                          Page No. 3


1.     The Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Water
       Resources, New Delhi.

2.     Executive Engineer, Central Water Commission, Lower Yamuna
       Mandal, Awas Vikas Colony, Sikandara Sector- 12 Quarter No.404 -
       409 near Central Jail, Agra.

3.     The Superintending engineer, Jal Vigyaniya Prakashan Parimandal,
       C-130 Sector -19 Noida. Present District - Gautam Budh Nagar.

                                            ..... ............. Respondents
By Advocate:       Shri N.P. Shukla


                               ORDER

Delivered by Hon'ble Mr. Rakesh Sagar Jain, Member (Judicial) These four Original Applications have almost similar facts and legal issues hence they are being disposed of by a common orders.

2. By filing aforesaid Original Applications under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 applicants seeking a direction for quashing the order dated 05.03.2010 passed by the respondent No.2 coupled with the prayer to direct the respondents to regularize the services of the applicants as regular class IVth employees in the department of Central Water Commission and pay the regular salary to the applicants with all consequential benefits.

3. At the very outset, learned counsel for the applicants stated that similar and identical issue has already been decided by this Page No. 4 Tribunal on 02.08.2018 in O.A. No.854 of 2011 (Manohar Singh vs. UOI & Ors) with the following observation:-

"In view of the limited prayer of counsel for the applicant, this O.A. is disposed of at this stage with the direction that in case, the applicant submits a detailed representation giving necessary justifications including some of the grounds taken in this O.A. along with his earlier representation at Annexure -10 and a copy of this order to the respondent No.2/Competent Authority within one month on receipt of copy of this order, then the respondent No.2/Competent Authority shall consider the said representation on merits as per the extant rules and dispose it of by passing a reasoned and speaking order to be communicated to the applicant within a period of three months from the date of receipt of such representation."

4. Learned counsel for the applicants, further, submitted that grievance of the applicants may be redressed if the similar direction is also given to the respondent No.2/competent authority to decide the representation of the applicants by reasoned and speaking order within a specified period of time.

5. Heard Shri K.K. Mishra, counsel for the applicants and Shri Avnish Tripathi, counsel for the respondents in O.A. No.1309 of 2010 and Shri Dharmendra Tiwari proxy to Shri N.P. Shukla, counsel for the respondents in other remaining O.As.

6. Since, the similar issue has already been decided by this Tribunal, as stated by counsel for the applicants, in O.A. No.854 of 2011, and he also requested to disposed of these Original Applications in same direction, hence, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, we disposed of these Original Page No. 5 Applications at this stage with the direction to the applicants to submit a detailed representation giving necessary justifications including some of the grounds taken in this O.A. along with their earlier representations and a copy of this order to the respondent No.2/Competent Authority within one month on receipt of copy of this order, then the respondent No.2/Competent Authority shall consider the said representation on merits as per the extant rules and dispose it of by passing a reasoned and speaking order to be communicated to the applicants within a period of three months from the date of receipt of such representation. No costs.

     (Mohd. Jamshed)                          [Rakesh Sagar Jain]
       Member -A                                   Member-J


Manish