The Supreme Court on Thursday put aside an October 2021 order of the Calcutta High Court, which put aside a call of the Central Administrative Tribunal in Delhi referring to a case filed by former West Bengal chief secretary Alapan Bandopadhyay, and held that the HC’s order The remark was “totally”. Unnecessary”.
A bench of justices AM Khanwilkar and CT Ravikumar mentioned the excessive courtroom’s order, which quashed the tribunal’s order to switch the case from Kolkata to Delhi, was “passed without jurisdiction” and “now void from the outset”. (legally void from the start)”.
It additionally rejected sure statements made by the High Court towards the tribunal and mentioned these had been “unnecessary, unwarranted and warranted a sharp reaction to the baseless assumptions”.
The Central Administrative Tribunal adjudicates disputes and complaints referring to the circumstances of service and recruitment of individuals appointed to the general public companies.
The high courtroom’s order got here on a plea by the central authorities, which in its October 29 judgment additionally flagged sure observations of the excessive courtroom.
The problem pertains to disciplinary proceedings towards Bandopadhyay for not attending a cyclone overview assembly chaired by Prime Minister Narendra Modi in West Bengal’s Medinipur district on May 28, 2021.
He was issued a present trigger discover and directed to report earlier than the Center on May 31, the day of his retirement. Bandopadhyay had challenged the disciplinary proceedings towards him within the Kolkata High Court.
On Thursday, a Supreme Court bench held that the Calcutta High Court has no energy to put aside the order of the tribunal. “It is clear that the Principal Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal at New Delhi, which passed the order” transferring the matter from Kolkata to Delhi, “falls within the territorial jurisdiction of the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi”, the apex courtroom mentioned.
“Needless to say that the judicial review of the power of judicial review of an order to transfer an original application pending before a Bench of the Tribunal to another Bench can be done only by a Division Bench of the High Court having territorial jurisdiction. The bench in the field is passing it, falls”, it added.
“In the current case, the High Court at Calcutta has acquired jurisdiction to entertain the writ petition … difficult the order handed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, New Delhi … even after being attentive to the truth that the Principal Bench of the Tribunal doesn’t lie inside its territorial jurisdiction”, the Supreme Court mentioned.
On the High Court’s remarks, criticizing the tribunal’s order to switch the matter, the bench noticed that there was “no extraordinary ground” to make reprehensible and derogatory remarks and remarks.
To train restraint, we state that the remarks made by the High Court had been unwarranted, unwarranted and warranted a pointy response to the baseless assumptions. Ergo, we’ve got no hesitation in believing that they had been fully pointless for the aim of deciding the correctness or in any other case of the switch order. Hence they need to be expelled. We do that,” the SC bench mentioned.
,
With inputs from TheIndianEXPRESS
