Union Of India & ORS v. Central Administrative Tribunal & ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.14194 of 2013 Date of Decision: May 04, 2015 Union of India and others .....Petitioners versus The Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench and another .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT.

HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.B.BAJANTHRI.

Present: Mr.Anil Rathee, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr.R.S.Dadwal, Advocate, for Mr.Aman Chaudhary, Adv. respondent No(s).2.

-.-

1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?

3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? --- Surya Kant, J. (Oral) This order shall dispose of Civil Writ Petition Nos.14194, 14212 and 14252 of 2013 as common questions of law and facts are involved in these cases.

For brevity, the facts are being extracted from Civil Writ Petition No.14194 of 2013.

Union of India and Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL) authorities have laid challenge to the orders dated 14.03.2013 and 17.04.2013 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, in a matter pertaining to assignment of seniority to respondent No.(s)2 for the post of Sub Divisional Engineer.

It may be seen from the short order passed by the Tribunal that the Original Application filed by respondent No.2 was allowed in terms of an earlier decision rendered in OA No.1138/CH/2011. It was further noticed that the OA was MOHINDER KUMAR 2015.05.12 16:04 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

CWP No.14194 of 2013 & connected cases [2] being allowed subject to final outcome of the proceedings which were pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. It may also be mentioned at this stage that the order passed by the Tribunal in OA No.1138/CH/2011 was upheld by this Court and against that decision, the matter was taken to the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

This writ petition was adjourned from time to time to await the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Learned counsel for the petitioners has very fairly pointed out that the Hon'ble Supreme Court has now vide judgment dated 21.01.2015 passed in Civil Appeal No.4389 of 2010 (Union of India and others versus Sohan Lal Sayal and others and other connected cases, upheld the orders passed by the Tribunal and this Court, though for the further resolution of the seniority list No.17 of 1993, an Expert Committee has been constituted and final order would be passed on the basis of the report of that Expert Committee. We, thus, dismiss these writ petitions following the dictum of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sohan Lal Sayal and others' case (supra), however, subject to the effect of the report of the Expert Committee constituted by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, if any, on the subject seniority. [SURYA KANT] JUDGE May 04, 2015 [P.B.BAJANTHRI] mohinder JUDGE MOHINDER KUMAR 2015.05.12 16:04 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh