1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 25^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2021

PRESENT

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA

AND

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA

WRIT PETITION NO.51119/2019 (S-CAT)

BETWEEN:

1.

THE CHAIRMAN,

CENTRAL BOARD OF WORKERS EDUCATION

ROOM NO. 21, JAMNAGAR HOUSE,

MANSINGH ROAD, N. DELHI 110011

2.

THE DIRECTOR,

CENTRAL BOARD OF WORKERS EDUCATION

NORTH AMBAZARI ROAD,

NEAR VRCE GATE, NAGPUR 440010

3.

UNION OF INDIA,

MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT

SHRAM SHAKTHI BHAVAN,

RAFIMARG, N. DELHI 110011.

REP BY ITS SECRETARY

…PETITIONERS

(BY SMT.SAROJINI MUTHANNA K., ADV.,)

AND:

1.

H.M.SHIVABORAIAH

S/O. SHRI. MUNIAPPA,

EDUCATION OFFICER,

CENTRAL BOARD OF WORKERS EDUCATION,

MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT,

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA,

OFFICE AT NO. 48, 1ST FLOOR

KARMIK KALYAN BHAVAN,

2

MATHIKERE MAIN ROAD,

YESHAVANTHPUR,

BANGALORE 560022.

R/AT 13 AND 14, PLOT NO. 101,

MALIGE APARTMENTS, 3RD CROSS,

DEVARAJ LAYOUT, BEHIND HORIZON SCHOOL,

NAGADEVANAHALLI,

BENGALURU 560056

2.

M R DESHPANDYE

S/O. LATE. VENKAT RAO,

EDUCATION OFFICER,

CENTRAL BOARD OF WORKERS EDUCATION,

MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT,

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA,

OFFICE AT NO. 48, 1ST FLOOR

KARMIK KALYAN BHAVAN,

MATHIKERE MAIN ROAD, YESHAVANTHPUR, BANGALORE

560022.

R/AT NO. 402, BILAD DYNASTY,

BEHIND BETHSADA CHURCH,

KENGERI UPANAGARA,

BENGALURU 560060

… RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI.K.ANANDA, ADV.)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF

THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE CENTRAL

ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE DTD 6.9.2016 IN OA

NO.170/01738 AND 01739/2016 VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.

THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR HEARING THIS DAY,

SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA J., MADE THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioners

being aggrieved by the order dated 6.9.2016 passed in

OA.No.170/01738 - 01739/2016, between H.M.Shivaboraiah and

3

Another vs. The Chairman, Central Board for Workers’ Education

and others.

2.

In the Original Application, the applicants therein

were claiming benefit of Modified Assured Career Progression

Scheme introduced by the Government of India vide Office

Memorandum dated 19.5.2009. They were claiming up-

gradation on completion of 10 years, 20 years and 30 years of

service. The Tribunal, after hearing the learned counsel for the

parties, has disposed of the Original Application with a direction

to the respondents therein to decide the representation

preferred by the applicants. Accordingly, the respondents have

decided the representation of the applicants on 14.6.2017.

3.

The

most

unfortunate

part

is

the

Central

Administrative Tribunal has subsequently passed an order dated

23.7.2018 on a suo moto exercise of the power of review and it

has reviewed its own order dated 6.9.2016 and has directed the

respondents/department to grant the benefit of MACP to the

respondents before this Court.

4.

This Court has carefully gone through the order

passed by the Tribunal in review petition which is also impugned

in the present writ petition as and by way of an amendment.

4

5.

The statutory provision governing the field ie., the

Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 r/w Central Administrative

Tribunal Rules of Practice, does not provide for any suo moto

review. Appendix IV to the Central Administrative Tribunal Rules

of Practice, 1993 (under Rule 49) provides for a procedure to be

followed in respect of the review. There is no such power

conferred under the Act of 1985 for suo moto review and

therefore, the order passed by the Tribunal in exercise of the so-

called suo moto power, is hereby quashed. As the petitioners in

this petition have already passed an order in respect of the

representation preferred by t