Excelsior Correspondent
Srinagar, Nov 12: The High Court has sought complete details from Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) Jammu bench with regard to pendency of cases before it since its establishment and the procedure of working of the CAT to deal with these cases.
The direction has been passed by the division bench of Justice Sanjeev Kumar and Justice Rajnesh Oswal in an appeal in which Senior Counsel R A Jan made two fold submissions, before the Division Bench with regard to jurisdiction of the Jammu and Kashmir Central Administrative Tribunal at Jammu.
He submitted before the court that the jurisdiction of CAT is not extendable to the service disputes of the Government employees of the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir and, therefore, the transfer of the writ petition of the appellant by this Court to the Central Administrative Tribunal is without jurisdiction and not correct in law.
Secondly, he added, the remedy available before the Central Administrative Tribunal at Jammu is not an efficacious and, therefore, the jurisdiction of this Court to entertain the petition despite the availability of an alternative remedy of filing a petition before the Central Administrative Tribunal cannot be said to have been ousted.
The DB after these submissions made by advocate Jan sought record of number of cases received by the Jammu Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal from High Court with effect from its establishment till filing of the reply as also the number of fresh cases instituted before it (CAT) since its establishment.
Court also sought the information from the CAT with regard to availability of orders passed by it to the parties or are uploaded on its official website on the same day or the day following its pronouncement or on some other future date.
“How many Benches of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jammu, are available and sit on a given day to take up the pending and the fresh cases. What is the roadmap prepared by the Tribunal to list the pending matters which have been transferred from this Court to the Central Administrative Tribunal Jammu Bench”, the DB directed.
The DB also asked the CAT to inform it as to how many pending and fresh cases are listed on the average in a day and how many are actually taken up for orders. “The requisite information be made available by or before the next date before the Bench”, read the order.
The Advocate General, has extensively argued on jurisdiction points as raised by advocate Jan but has shown his inability to assist the Court functioning of the CAT in the absence of relevant data available with him.
Court also sought details of the number of cases received from the High Court which have been finally disposed by the Jammu Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal and the time that is taken by the Tribunal for processing and listing of fresh cases. “Whether the cases filed on a given day are listed on the same day or on the day following the day of its filing or some other future date. The Tribunal shall indicate the procedure adopted by it in listing and considering the fresh cases”, the DB directed.
In view of the aforesaid improvement, the Court arrayed the Union of India, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievance and Pensions, through its Secretary, New Delhi, and Central Administrative Tribunal, New Delhi, through its Chairman, as party/respondents.
Follow our WhatsApp channel
