The Administrative Tribunal cannot set aside arbitral awards as jurisdiction for such challenges lies exclusively under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, requiring adherence to its defined procedures.

ORDER

Hon’ble Mr. Manish Garg, Member (J) :

In the present Original Application filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act , 1985, the applicants have prayed for the following reliefs:-

“(i) to quash and set aside the award dated 13.03.2004 passed by the Learned Arbitrator to the extent that it has denied up-gradation of pay scales to the applicants from 4500-7000 to 5000-8000.

(ii) upgrade the initial pay scales for the post of Pharmacists from Rs.4500-7000/- to pay scale of Rs.5000-8000/- w.e.f. 01.01.1996 with arrears and its replacement scale under the 6th CPC in Pay Band 9300-34,800/- with Grade Pay 4200/- and consequent fixation under CPC.

(iii) pass any other or further relief(s) as this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.”

2. Highlighting the facts of the case, learned counsel for the applicants submitted as under:

2.1 The case of the applicants is that, in accordance with the agreed settlement dated 11.09.1997, in case where there is a disagreement in the National/Departmental Anomaly Committee between the official side and the staff side, the matter will be referred to an 'Arbitrator '.

2.2 The said agreed settlement clearly indicates that the Government evolved a mechanism to address anomalies arising in cases where there is disagreement in the National/Departmental Anomaly Committee between the official side and the staff side; in such situations, the matter would be referred to an Arbitrator before approaching the Central Administrative Tribunal for redressal of the issues.

2.3 The matter was already pending consideration before this Tribunal, wherein a proposal came from the respondents' side and the applicants accepted the same. Accordingly, this Tribunal vide order dated 13.03.2003 referred the matter to the Learned Arbitrator interalia observing as under:-

"We note that in the counter filed by the respondents, they have stated that in cases where there is a disagreement in the National Departmental Anomaly Committee between the official side and the staff side, the matter will be referred to an 'Arbitrator ' which has also been agreed to by the Applicants.

In view of the above position, we appoint Shri S.R. Adige, Retired Vice Chairman of the Central Administrative Tribunal as Sole Arbitrator to deal with the above claims of the applications. After hearing both the parties, he shall give a reasoned Award. "

2.4 The respondent filed Writ Petition No. CW 5932/03 before the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi against the reference made for appointment of the Arbitrator vide order dated 13.03.2003 passed by this Tribunal, which came to be dismissed as withdrawn on 16.09.2003.

2.5 The Arbitrator appointed in pursuance of the order of this Tribunal thereafter passed the award dated 13.03.2004 without properly considering the submissions made on behalf of the applicants, learned counsel argued.

2.6 It has been contended that arbitration is not an alternate remedy under the Administrative Tribunals Act , 1985, for redressal of the claims of Government servants. It is submitted that Sections 14 to 18 of the said Act deal with the jurisdiction, powers and authority of the Tribunal, particularly Section 14 thereof.

2.7 The applicants thereafter filed a writ petition before the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi bearing W.P. 21248/2005 against the award dated 13.03.2004 passed by the Arbitrator, which was withdrawn vide order dated 18.10.2016, on the oral observations of the Ld. Judge of the High Court as to how the writ is maintainable when the Central Administrative Tribunal has the jurisdiction to consider all matters related to Central Government Servants and the High Court only interferes with the order/judgment passed by the Administrative Tribunal while exercising jurisdiction under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India and not the challenge to the Award, which is not an Award as provided under the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act , 1996. The then Ld