IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT
SANJAY DHAR, J.
Khursheed Ahmad Din - Petitioners
Vs.
UT of J&K and Ors - Respondent(s)
WP(C) No.2114 OF 2020, CCP(S) No.08 OF 2021
Decided On :
(A) Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 - Sections 3(q), 29, and 17 - Transfer of service matters - The petition concerning service matters is transferred to the Central Administrative Tribunal, Srinagar Bench, as per the provisions of the Act applicable to Union Territories post-reorganization - The contempt petition regarding violation of interim order is dismissed as not maintainable, with liberty to approach the Tribunal under Section 17. (Paras 1, 2, 3, and 4)
Facts of the case:
The petition WP
(C) No.2114/2020 pertains to service matters under the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, and is transferred to the Central Administrative Tribunal, Srinagar, for adjudication. The contempt petition CCP(S) No.08/2021 alleges violation of an interim order regarding joining report.
Findings of Court:
The court found that the contempt petition is not maintainable as per the established legal precedent, directing the petitioners to seek remedy before the Central Administrative Tribunal.
Issues: The main issues addressed include the transfer of service matters to the Central Administrative Tribunal and the maintainability of the contempt petition regarding interim orders.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that contempt proceedings related to orders from the High Court, once transferred to the Tribunal, must be pursued under the Tribunal's authority as per Section 17 of the Act.
Result: Contempt petition dismissed.
JUDGE :
WP(C) No.2114/2020:
1. The subject matter of this petition falls within the definition of ‘service matters’ as contained in Section 3(q) of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’), which has become applicable to the Union Territories of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh, after coming into force of the Jammu and Kashmir Re-organization Act, 2019 w. e. f 31.10.2019. Section 29 of the Act provides for transfer of the pending cases of such nature to the Central Administrative Tribunal upon establishment of the Tribunal.
2. A permanent Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal stands established at Srinagar with its jurisdiction extending to the Kashmir province and Kargil District of Ladakh and it has started functioning at Srinagar. Accordingly, this petition (WP(C) No.2114/2020) shall stand transferred to the Central Administrative Tribunal, Srinagar Bench.
3. Registry is directed to immediately transmit the record of the case to the Central Administrative Tribunal, Srinagar Bench, where the parties shall appear on 3rd of March, 2025.
CCP(S) No.08/2021:
1. Through the medium of instant petition the petitioner has complained about violation of interim order dated 29.12.2020 passed in WP(C) No.2114/2020, whereby the respondent No.4 was directed to entertain the joining report of the petitioner as against the post selected in terms of order No.DCB/PS/22 dated 16.12.2020 and complete formalities as requisitioned under law.
2. Main writ petition stands transferred to Central Administrative Tribunal in terms of above order passed in WP (C) No.2114/2020.
3. A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in case titled Abdul Qayoom Guroo vs. Ajeet Kumar Sahoo and Others , CCP(S) No.144/2020, decided on 29.09.2021 , has, while considering the question as to whether Central Administrative Tribunal constituted under Section 4 of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985 [“the Act”] has power and authority under Section 17 of the Act to punish for contempt in relation to an interim order passed by the High Court in a writ petition, which was subsequently transferred to it under Section 29 of the Act, held that contempt proceedings in relation to orders passed by this Court in the petitions, which subsequently stand transferred to the Tribunal under Section 29 of the Act, shall lie only and only before the Tribunal under Section 17 of the Act.
4. In view of the aforesaid ratio laid down by this Court, the instant contempt petition is held to be not maintainable. The same is, accordingly, dismissed with liberty to the petitioners to approach the Central Administrative Tribunal by way of an application under Section 17 of the Act read with Contempt of Courts (CAT) Rules, 1992.
Contempt proceedings related to transferred High Court orders must be pursued under the Central Administrative Tribunal's authority as per Section 17 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985.
The Central Administrative Tribunal has exclusive jurisdiction over contempt proceedings related to interim orders of the High Court once a case is transferred under Section 29 of the Administrative ....
Contempt proceedings in cases where orders passed by the High Court in petitions subsequently stand transferred to the Central Administrative Tribunal shall lie only before the Tribunal under Section....
The importance of the final decision being made by the Central Administrative Tribunal without being influenced by any observation made in the contempt proceedings.
The Central Administrative Tribunal must act as a court of first instance, addressing factual inquiries rather than merely exercising judicial review powers.
The Chairman of the CAT must consider the jurisdictional rights of employees and the administrative nature of transfer powers under the Central Administrative Act.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.