Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

orders suggest at the ese elevations 28 Postman. and PA 7 were: direct recruitments cand not promotion. The Learned | counsel. also urged that chese precedents "would - pind this Tribunal py virtue of the 2 principles of judicial propriety.

9. In a batch of OAs ied by OA No.93/2019 of Natvarbhai ®.Makwana v. UOI and Ors., the issue oe 33° :

OA Nos.$73/2014, 190/2018, 17/2017, 18472017, 185/2017, 263/2017, 65/2017, 266/2017, 296/201 7, 297/2017, 450/2017, 4935/2017, 375/2015, 5315/2015, 676/2015,, 671/2014, 672 2014, 673/2014, 674/2014 consideréd there was for Postmen who had apseared in LDCE and become 2A which they had conten rded was noz a.
93. Hon'ble- Si prem ourt in the case "of Lala. » Shri. Bhagwan cand Shri. Ram Chand: and. Ang 1965) SC. 1767. laid: "Gown: "It is hardly» "necessary. to- emphasis 'that considerations: of. judicial. propriety and: decorum 'require that 'SF a learned sifigle Judge hearing a@ matter is inclined to teke the view - that the earlier decisions. of 'the 'High 'Court, whether of 2 Division Bench or of 2 single Judge, need to be re- "éonsidered, lie should not embark upon | that. enquiry sitting. as a single Judge, but: . should. refer. the. matter. to a Division 'Bench, or, .imn-@ . proper case, place. the relevant papers: "before. the Chief Justice to enable Rim 00 'to. constitute. @ larger: Bench. to. examine the oy quest tion: That 'isthe proper and traditional ae Way to deal with such matters and it. fs... 'founded cn healthy pr inciples. of judicial: a decorum and propriety." ° | in. another ease, namely Tribhuvandas

'down by Hon'ble High Courts and 'Coordi nate Benches | of this. Tribunal on the issue, end hold..that, past. of Postal. Assistant is not 8 promotional ¢ pest. of the. "Postman". x0. "the: | 'earned counsel for. respondents Shri ¥.3S. wesurkar invited the attention of the ben ich to the fact 'that in' the case of | D, Sivakumar (supra) , the yon' ble Apex, Court pad nade ¢_sinplicitor dismissal cand had. spec ifically lef tthe matter open on the issue _.. £ law. Following judicial propriety, che orders of the Tribunal that were upheld by the Hon'ble High "court in t the case of Surendra Peepliwal (supra), were implement ed. although in 'the process. of review, the Judgment has subsequently pean withdrawn by the Eon'ble High 'Court. This is. in consonance with the 2 40...

- the decision of the Ahmedabad Bench of this Tribunal "in OR No. 93/2019 etc. "entirely followed Bhanwar Lal "Regar (supra) directly or thro ough the medium of the other Suagnenes cited in the matter and hed adopted those: decision 1s. purely as a matter of judicial : propriety | However, in tems or. the. decisions taken by the Full Bench of this 'eipunal, at, the: 'principal 'Bench | 7 OA. No. $55/2002 along. with six other OAs "in mantener of India and Ors. (98 16.4.2004,.

it was held that various benches. Of. this Tribunals: