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 1, Cited by 0]

Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)

Mr. Debojit Samanta... For vs Indian Institute Of Mass Communication ... on 1 August, 2014

Author: Pranab Kumar Chattopadhyay

Bench: Pranab Kumar Chattopadhyay

                                         1


01.08.2014
(33)
DC.




                               A.S.T. 336 of 2014
                                     with
                               A.S.T.A. 240 of 2014



                   Mr. Surojit Samanta
                   Mr. Debojit Samanta... for Appellants

                  Ms. Rabindra Nath Pal
                  Mr. Koustava Ratan Chatterjee
                             ... for Union of India


                         Re : A.S.T.A. 240 of 2014.


                      This application has been filed in connection with
             the appeal preferred from the judgement and order dated 26th
             June, 2014 whereby a Learned Judge                of     this    Court
             disposed of the writ petition by sending the matter back to the
             appropriate Ministry under the Union of India with a direction
             to intimate the Petitioner No. 1 appellant/Association whether
             any decision with regard to the grievances of the appellants
             herein have already been taken by the concerned department.


                      The Learned Single Judge further held that if no
             such decision has been taken or if the request of the
             appellants has already been turned down, then the concerned
             authority will pass an appropriate order pursuant to the
             decision taken by the Delhi High Court.


                      The      learned        Advocate      representing        the
             appellants/petitioners submits that the Delhi High Court has
             not taken any decision in the matter where identical issue has
             been raised for consideration.


                      The learned Advocate of the respondents also

admits that Delhi High Court has not taken any decision.

In the aforesaid circumstances, we vary the impugned order under appeal by directing the appropriate authority of the concerned Ministry to take necessary decision on the grievances of the appellants/petitioners without any further delay but positively within a period of six weeks from the date of communication 2 of this order without awaiting for the decision of the Delhi High Court.

The learned Advocate of the appellants/petitioners has cited a decision of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench in the case of Association of the Employees of Indian Institute of Maws Communication & Anr. vs. Indian Institute of Mass Communication & Ors. in T.A. No. 1101 of 2009 and submits that the authority concerned while deciding the grievances of the appellants/petitioners should also consider the aforesaid decision of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench.

We, therefore, direct the concerned authority to take note of the aforesaid decision of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench in T.A. 1101 of 2009 while deciding the grievances of the appellants/petitioners in terms of this order.

The learned Advocate-on-Record of the appellants/petitioners is directed to communicate the gist of this order together with a copy of the aforesaid decision of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench to the respondent authorities immediately.

With the aforesaid directions, we dispose of both the application as well as appeal upon treating the said appeal as on day's list.

In the facts of the present case, there will however, be no order as to costs.

Urgent xerox certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties as early as possible.

(Pranab Kumar Chattopadhyay-J.) (Samapti Chatterjee-J.) 3