J.S. VERMA, C.J.—The question referred to this Bench for decision is the following: -

"Whether an adverse entry in the Annual performance Appraisal Report of the Government Servant will fall under Clause (v) of Sec. 2(f) of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Service Matters Appellate Tribunals) Act, 1976 and the Service Appellate Tribunal will have jurisdiction to entertain an anneal in the matter?"

2. The occasion for making this reference arose when the Division Bench before which this petition came up for hearing was inclined to take the view that an adverse entry in the Annual Performance Appraisal Report of a government servant tails within the ambit of sub-clause (v) of clause (f) of Section 2 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Service Matters Appellate Tribunals) Act 1976 (for short the Act). This was also the view of an earlier Single Bench in the State of Rajasthan V. Narendra Singh Verma (1), but a contrary view was taken by another Division Bench in Dr. Dinesh Mathur V. Rajasthan Civil Service Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur (D. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 67 of 1984 decided on May 10, 1988). Accordingly, this reference was made to settle the controvert on the point.

3. A brief reference to the object of enacting the Rajasthan Civil Services (Service Matters Appellate Tribunals) Act, 1976 and its silent features would be appropriate. Prior to this enactment and constitution of the Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal thereunder the remedy of the aggrieved Rajasthan State government servant was to approach the civil court by a suit and the High Court or Supreme Court by a writ petition in respect of a service matter as defined in section 2(t) of the Act. The object of this enactment and constitution of the Tribunal thereunder is to substitute the forum of the Tribunal in place of the ordinary courts constituted under the general law for redressing these griev-ances of the State Government servants. It is in this back ground that the defini-tion of service matter contained in clause (f) of section 2 of the Act has to be understood. Obviously the intention is to substitute the forum of the Tribunal under the Act for the ordinary civil courts only in respect of the service matters falling within the definition contained in section 2(f). Any matter which ordinarily was not taken to courts of general jurisdiction prior to this enactment is not expected to be provided for in this Act. Any matter falling outside the ambit of service matter defined in section 2(f) would be outside the purview of the Art and jurisdiction of the Tribunal constituted under the Act will not extend to it

4. The definition of service matter in section 2(f) is given by specifying certain matters in sub-clauses (i) to (vii) and making residuary provision in sub-clause (viii) by including any other matter notified by the State Government This residuary provision itself indicates that the matters specified in sub-clauses (i) to (vii) are not exhaustive of all matters relating to the service of a government servant in respect of which he may have a grievance Exclusion of penalties in sub clauses (v) to (vii) is also a similar indication. Sub-clause (viii) enables the State Government by a notification to include any other matter relating to a government servant which is not covered by sub-clauses (i) to (vii). This indicates that there is no need to strain the language of any part of sub-clause (i) to (vii) to include any matter relating to a government servant if it does not appear to be included within it according to the plain meaning of the language. It is open to the State Government to include it by a notification to bring it within clause (viii). Otherwise the remedy in the courts of general jurisdiction, if any, continues unimpaired because the matter is not within the ambit of the Act.

5. Section 3 of the Act provides for constitution and composition of the Tribunals; sections 5 to 8 deal with ancillary matters; section 9 provides limitation for appeals

Click Here to Read the rest of this document