Back
VIPIN SANGHI, JASMEET SINGH
Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Company Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Secretary, Department of Financial Services – Respondent
ORDER
W.P.(C) 3668/2021
1. The Union of India has filed an affidavit pursuant to the hearing held on 02.12.2021. It is stated in the said affidavit that the report of the Search-cum-Selection Committee with regard to the selection of Presiding Officers for DRTs is shortly awaited.
2. The respondent No. 1 has also placed on record a copy of the notification dated 13.12.2021 bearing No. 7/1/2021-DRT issued in exercise of powers conferred by Section 4(1) of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 whereby the additional charge has been entrusted to the Presiding Officers of several Debts Recovery Tribunals in respect of DRTs where the Presiding Officers are not in office. So far as three DRTs in Delhi are concerned, the work of DRT-I Delhi would be managed by Shri R.M. Khushwaha, PO, DRT-Allahabad, the work of DRT-II Delhi would be managed by Shri Vimal Gupta, PO, DRT-Aurangabad, and the work of DRT-III would be managed by Shri R.M. Khushwaha, PO, DRT-Allahabad.
3. The notification states that the said charge has been entrusted "for a period upto 31.12.2021, or till joining of a regular incumbent, or till further orders, whichever is the earliest".
4. Considering the fact tha
Ensuring access to justice by addressing the lack of Presiding Officers in the DRTs.
The court emphasized timely hearings and intervention in cases where lower tribunals fail to function, maintaining status quo on property until hearings are conducted.
Courts can issue directions for urgent relief when the functioning of tribunals is delayed.
The Presiding Officer of a Debt Recovery Tribunal does not hold a civil post, and thus the Central Administrative Tribunal lacks jurisdiction over matters concerning such appointments under the Recov....
DRT cannot be said to be holding a civil post under the Union and therefore, CAT did not have the jurisdiction to entertain the present O.A..
The court mandated a preliminary scrutiny of allegations against the Presiding Officer of DRT, emphasizing accountability and the need for judicial decorum.
The Union of India is obligated to promptly implement improvements for Debt Recovery Tribunals, as suggested by the Supreme Court, underlining the supervisory authority of High Courts as stipulated i....
Courts may direct interim measures in the absence of tribunal appointments to ensure access to justice.
The court considered the jurisdictional issue of the DRT's decision on the question of title and the impact of the vacancy in the office of the Chairperson of the DRAT(M) on the petitioner's appeal.
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
