Excelsior Correspondent
SRINAGAR, Feb 28: High Court has ruled that the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) cannot direct the employer to issue formal orders in tune with its direction and reversed the decision of CAT directing the SKUAST to grant sanction to its employee for foreign assignment at United Arab Emirates University (UAEU).
The Division Bench of Justice Sindhu Sharma and Justice Shahzad Azeem allowed the plea of SKUAST by setting aside the judgment of Tribunal whereby SKUAST was directed to grant post-facto sanction to its employee- Dr. Ankur Sharma working as Associate Professor in the varsity for foreign assignment at the UAEU.
The court, however, directed the SKUAST to consider the application of the employee for grant of permission strictly within the contours of law by a speaking order, within a period of four weeks from the date copy of this Judgment is made available.
“The role of the Tribunal is very limited to adjudicate and consider as to whether the action of the employer contravenes any statutory provision involving right of an employee to ask for permission to go abroad or same is mala fide and discretionary, but, in any case, the Tribunal cannot substitute its own decision for that of the employer or mandating the grant of permission outright as that would amount to interfering with the legitimate administrative discretion”, read the judgment
Dr Sharma in communication dated October 07, 2024 applied for seeking permission to apply online for the position of Instructor and Associate/ Professor at the UAEU and further to attend as a follow-up the interview through same mode. Despite the active follow up by her, she faced delays for the requisite permission.
She, thereafter, received an employment offer from UAEU for the post of Instructor commencing from January 06, 2025 till July 31, 2028, renewable by mutual agreement between the parties. Accordingly, she, vide communication dated December 11, 2024, apprised the Registrar, SKUAST, that she had applied and appeared for an online interview for employment opportunity at the UAEU and now she is being informed of her selection as an Instructor and tenure whereof has been commencing from January 06, 2025 till July 31, 2028.
However, while awaiting the outcome of her request for necessary permission and protection of lien during the foreign assignment, she was served with a show cause notice dated December 18, 2024, so as to explain as to how she had applied for the foreign assignment and appeared in an interview without formal permission of the competent authority.
“The employee may not have a cause to approach the Tribunal against a mere show cause notice as the competent authority has yet to take a call on the explanation tendered by her”, the bench said.
The bench recorded that the Tribunal has overstepped by substituting its views in place of the competent authority by quashing the show cause notice dated December 18, 2024, instead of leaving it to the employer to consider the case within the ambit of the Rules governing the subject.
Follow our WhatsApp channel
