Back
ANIRUDDHA BOSE, BELA M. TRIVEDI
Rajnish Kumar Rai – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT
ANIRUDDHA BOSE, J.
Delay condoned.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
3. The proceeding of which transfer is asked for, was instituted by the petitioner himself before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad and it has reached final stage of hearing. The petitioner’s application for transfer of the proceeding to the Ahmedabad Bench of the same Tribunal was rejected by the Principal Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Delhi by an order passed on 04.02.2022. The petitioner questioned the legality of the said order before the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad invoking its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. But his plea was not accepted by the High Court relying on a judgment of this Court in the case of Union of India -vs- Alapan Bandyopadhyay [(2022) 3 SCC 133]. The High Court relied on the following passage from the case of Alapan Bandyopadhyay (supra) in dismissing the writ petition, holding that it lacked territorial jurisdiction to entertain that petition. It has been, inter-alia, held in the case of Alapan Bandyopadhyay (supra):-
Proceeding cannot be transferred when matter has reached final stage of hearing.
The judgment emphasized the need for clarifying the territorial jurisdiction of High Courts under Article 226(2) in relation to challenges against orders passed by the Chairman, CAT, Principal Bench,....
Power of judicial review of an order transferring an Original Application pending before a Bench of Tribunal to another Bench under Section 25 of Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 can be judicially ....
A court or tribunal must decide a pending application for vacation of an interim stay before initiating or insisting upon compliance under the threat of contempt. Preemptively enforcing an interim or....
The jurisdiction under Section 24 CPC is concurrent between the High Court and District Court, but a party cannot challenge a transfer order in both courts; they must choose one forum.
The concurrent jurisdiction of the High Court and District Court under Section 24 CPC allows for transfer applications, but a party cannot challenge a transfer order in the same manner after one cour....
The jurisdiction under Section 24 CPC is concurrent between the High Court and District Court, but a party cannot challenge a transfer order in both courts; they must choose one forum for their remed....
The Chairman of the CAT must consider the jurisdictional rights of employees and the administrative nature of transfer powers under the Central Administrative Act.
The jurisdiction of a High Court under Article 227 pertains only to the Debts Recovery Tribunal located within its territorial limits, not an appellate tribunal for matters originating outside its ju....
Reading of section 260A(1) would go to show that an appeal shall lie to the High Court from “every order” passed in appeal by the Tribunal if the High Court is satisfied that the case involves a subs....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
