Judgment [Per: Hon'ble J.C.S. Rawat, Chairman]

1. This matter has been referred by the Division Bench to a larger Bench of this Tribunal for consideration of following question:

"Whether the vires of rules, regulations, government orders or letters can be challenged before the Uttarakhand Public Services Tribunal."

2. The controversy arose before the Division Bench comprising of Hon'ble Sri V.K.Maheshwari, Vice Chairman(J) and Hon'ble Sri U.D.Chaube, Member(A) when the petitioner filed a petition before the Tribunal seeking following relief:

"In view of the facts mentioned in Para 4 above, of the petition prays for the following relief : -

i. To issue an order or direction to set aside impugned notification dated 24.12.2008 and the letter No. DG-1-201-08(2) of dated 20.12.2008 issued by respondent No.3, after calling the entire record and the aforesaid letter dated 20.12.2008 declaring the same as illegal and against the service rules of 2004 along with its effect and operation also.

ii. Issue an order or direction, directing to the respondents to determine the year wise vacancies of S.I. for promoted quota w.e.f. 9.11.2000 and to prepare the eligibility list year wise amongst the eligible candidates and to consider their case of promotion as per rules in vogue.

iii. To declare the petitioners duly promoted as S.I. in the S.I. cadre under promoted quota within the vacancies available under promoted quota w.e.f. 2001, ignoring the camouflage nomenclature of S.I. (Special Category) and further to declare them permanent S.I. after completion of their probation i.e. in 2007 along with all consequential benefits also.

iv. To declare that after the rules for promotion made by the State Government in 2004, the posts under promoted quota in the respondents department also to be filled up by these rules and no other mode for promotion can be made by the respondent Nos. 2 to 4 as the rules framed by the personnel department are having overriding effect to all Government Departments.

v. To issue any other order or direction, which this Hon'ble Tribunal Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case.

vi. Award cost of the petition in favour of the petitioner."

3. Thereafter on 18.1.2011 the petitioner further amended his petition by adding following relief:

"To declare the provisions of Government Order dated 16.5.2005 specifically clauses-6 as illegal and against the Police Act and Regulations and being inoperative and non-est in the eye of law and also discriminatory and further to hold that there is no difference amongst the regularly promoted S.I. and S.I. (Spl.) category in respect of work and duties and other service benefits including dress code ignoring the order dated 20.10.2008, which is running contrary to the judgment of this Tribunal and against the dress regulations."

4. The Ld. A.P.O. appearing for the State challenged that the Tribunal does not have the power or authority to declare any Government order, Rule, Regulation or Letter to be violative of the rules or law. This power vests upon the Hon'ble High Court only. Before the Tribunal, the petitioner relied upon a judgment passed by the Division Bench of this Tribunal in claim petition 126/T/2003 Smt. Sujata Vs. State of Uttaranchal & others in which the Government order was challenged and the Division Bench of the Tribunal held that the impugned Government order and adoption and modification order dated 7.11.2002 being in variance to UP Bal Vikas Avam Pushtahar Rules 1996, which are not applicable to the petitioner without approval of the Central Government and the claim petition was partly allowed. In view of the above, a Full Bench was constituted to decide the matter.

5. I have heard at length to the parties and perused the record. Ld. Counsel for the petitioner contended that the preamble of the Public Services Tribunal Act clearly provides that all the disputes in respect of the service matters relating to the employment of all public servants of the State a

Click Here to Read the rest of this document