Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Vivek Bansal vs Union Of India Through on 31 March, 2009
Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench OA 817/2008 MA 690/2008 MA 1010/2008 MA 1287/2008 New Delhi, this the 31st day of March, 2009 Honble Mr. Justice V.K. Bali, Chairman Honble Mr. L.K.Joshi, Vice Chairman(A) 1. Vivek Bansal s/o Dr. M.P. Bansal, R/o D-204, Prince Apartment, 54-I.P. Extension, Delhi. 2. J.J.R. Meena s/o Sh. Dhanna Lal, R/o A-5, Sree Balaji, Plot No. 37, Sector 6, Dwarka, Delhi 75. 3. G.P. Bansal s/o Sh. R.P. Bansal, R/o 2A/201, Rang Rasayan Apartment, 7/4, Sector 13, Rohini, Delhi. 4. Pawan Kumar s/o Sh. Ram Diya, R/o 3/82, 1st Floor, Back Side Krishna Nagar, S.J. Enclave, New Delhi. Applicant (By Advocate: Shri A.K. Behera) Versus 1. Union of India through, The Secretary, Ministry of Urban Development, Nirman Bhawan, New Delhi 110 001. 2. The Secretary, Department of Personnel & Training, North Block, New Delhi. 3. D.G. (Works), C.P.W.D. Nirman Bhawan, Delhi 110 001. 4. The Chairman, Union Public Service Commission, Dholpur House, Sahajahan Road, New Delhi. Respondents (By Advocate: Shri H.K. Gangwani and Sh. Sanjay Jain) ORDER (ORAL) Justice V.K. Bali, Chairman:
As between the applicants and the official respondents there is absolutely no dispute that the matter in hand is covered by decision of this Tribunal in OA No. 1310/2008 in the matter of B.P. Singh vs. Union of India & Ors. decided on 09.01.2009, ad idem, therefore, counsel for the applicants and official respondents state that this Tribunal, for parity of reasons, may issue the same directions as were given in OA No. 1310/2008 (supra).
2. Mr. Sanjay Jain, who represents the applicant in MA No. 1287/2008 seeking impleadment, however, states that some decisions recorded by Honble Delhi High Court were not taken notice of by the Bench of this Tribunal deciding OA No. 1310/2008, and further that against the order passed by this Tribunal dated 09.01.2009, a writ has since already been filed before the Honble High Court of Delhi and the same is now listed for hearing on 28.04.2009 for final disposal. He, however, admits that no stay is operating against the order of the Tribunal dated 09.01.2009.
3. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and with their assistance examined the records of the case.
4. As mentioned above, there is no dispute between the applicants and the official respondents that this matter is covered by the decision of this Tribunal in OA No.1310/2008. Learned counsel representing the applicant seeking impleadment would not dispute the facts aforesaid but, however, state that because of some judgments of Honble Delhi High Court earlier in point of time, the decision could not have been recorded by this Tribunal. Once a writ has since already been filed challenging the decision of this Tribunal dated 09.01.2009 before the Honble High Court of Delhi, we are sanguine that the matter would be taken to its logical end and decision recorded therein would be binding. There is no need to stay the proceedings at this stage. If the applicant in MA No.1287/2008 is aggrieved of the order dated 09.01.2009, he can agitate the matter before Delhi High Court with liberty to take all points as have been sought to be taken today by the learned counsel.
5. In view of the above observations, this Original Application is disposed of with the same directions as issued in OA No.1310/2008. There shall be no order as to costs.
(L.K. Joshi) (V.K. Bali) Vice Chairman (A) Chairman /naresh/