Anit Kumar vs The Union Of India on 21 September, 2020

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Jharkhand High Court

Anit Kumar vs The Union Of India on 21 September, 2020

Equivalent citations: AIRONLINE 2020 JHA 939

Bench: Rajesh Shankar

                                 1

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                  W.P.(C) No. 4488 of 2019
Anit Kumar                                         ...   ...      Petitioner
                                 Versus
1. The Union of India
2. The Union of India through its Director, CSIR-CIMFR (Council of
   Scientific and Industrial Research) -(Central Institute of Mining and
   Fuel Research) a Constituent Institute of Council of Scientific &
   Industrial Research, under the aegis of Ministry of Science &
   Technology, Government of India, Dhanbad
3. The Administrative Officer, Recruitment Section CSIR-CIMFR
   (Council of Scientific and Industrial Research) - (Central Institute of
   Mining and Fuel Research) a Constituent Institute of Council of
   Scientific & Industrial Research, under the aegis of Ministry of
   Science & Technology, Government of India, Dhanbad
                                                   ...     ...Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR For the Petitioner :- Mr. Dinesh Kumar, Advocate For the Union of India :- Mrs. Bakshi Bibha, C.G.C. For the Resp. nos. 2 & 3 :- Mr. Abhay Prakash, Advocate Order No. 05 Dated: 21.09.2020 The present case is taken up through video conferencing.

2. The present writ petition has been filed for quashing/setting aside the office memorandum no. 8/3474/2018-Est-I/246 dated 04.07.2019 (Annexure-5 to the writ petition) issued by the respondent no. 3- the Administrative Officer, Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) - Central Institute of Mining and Fuel Research (CIMFR), Dhanbad whereby the appointment of the petitioner as Security Officer has been terminated after completion of probation period of one year without holding any departmental inquiry or without giving show cause notice to him.

3. Mr. Abhay Prakash, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent nos. 2 and 3, raises an objection with regard to maintainability of the writ petition by submitting that under Section 14 (2) read with Section 14 (3) of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 (13 of 1985), any dispute with regard to service matters relating to CSIR is to be raised before the Central Administrative Tribunal as notified vide notification no.- C.S.R.-1172 (E) dated 31.10.1986.

4. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and keeping in 2 view that vide impugned order dated 04.07.2019, the service of the petitioner as Security Officer has been terminated by the respondent no. 3 and the Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna, Circuit Bench at Ranchi has been conferred with the jurisdiction to adjudicate the said service dispute, I am of the view that the present writ petition is not maintainable before this Court at this stage. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed as not maintainable. The petitioner is however at liberty to prefer an appropriate application on the present issue before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna, Circuit Bench at Ranchi.

5. I.A. No. 4784 of 2020 also stands dismissed accordingly.

(Rajesh Shankar, J.) Ritesh/

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Jharkhand High Court