4 - O.A No. 2201/2013 CAT Principle Bench, New Delhi

8/13/2019 4 - O.A No. 2201/2013 CAT Principle Bench, New Delhi

1/32

IN THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI

O.A. No.___2201 __OF 2013.

IN THE MATTER OF

Madh!" Da#!a$..A%%$"&a'(

V)!**

U'"o' o+ I'd"a.............................R)*%o'd)'(

INDE

S$.No.

PARTICULARS PA-ENO.S/

1. Rejoinder of the Applicant to the Counter-Replydated 11.11.2013 of the Respondent

01-11

2. Annexure: A-15!ffice "e#orandu# dated 30.01.1$%&'

12-13

3. Annexure: A-1()etter dated 10.05.2012 addressed to *hri +ul,ir*inh )etter dated 10.05.2012 addressed to theApplicant )etter dated 05.10.2012 addressed to*hri +ul,ir *inh )etter dated 05.10.2012addressed to the Applicant and /ro#otion !rderdated 22.01.2013 of *hri +ul,ir *inh'

1-20

. Annexure: A-1%Releant /ortions of /ostal "anual olu#e-4

Chapter-'

21-2

5. Annexure: A-1&uotations fro# 6ud#ents reardin 7on-Application of "ind'

25-30

/lace : 7e8 9elhi Sa'a a! Da*;9ate : 25.11.2013 Adocate for the Applicant


2/32

-2-

NET DATE OF HEARIN- 4 25.11.2013.


3/32

-3-

IN THE CENTRAL ADMIISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI

O.A. No.___2201 __OF 2013.IN THE MATTER OF

Madh!" Da#!a$..A%%$"&a'(

V)!**

U'"o' o+ I'd"a.............................R)*%o'd)'(

RE6OINDER OF THE APPLICANT TO THE COUNTER7

REPL8 DATED 11.11.2013 OF THE RESPONDENT

1.


4/32

-4-


5/32

-5-

+ul,ir *inh to the =on?,le "inister of Co##unications and

nfor#ation


6/32

-6-

!ffice "e#orandu# dated 30.01.1$%& clearly points out to their

uly face4 #alicious intent and attitude of undue harass#ent.

5.


7/32

-7-

correspondin /araraph of the !A hae ,een ad#itted ,y the

Respondent 9epart#ent.

1@.


8/32

-8-

23.


9/32

-9-

/ersonnel and


10/32

-10-

3?.


11/32

-11-

correspondin /araraph of the !A are reiterated. I( a 'o( #)

o( o+ %$a&) (o )'("o' h)!) (ha( (h) A%%$"&a'( ha*'o(#))'

%!oo()d (o (h) S)'"o! Ad"'"*(!a(";) -!ad) o+ (h) I'd"a'

Po*(a$ S)!;"&) d) (o (h) B)$o: B)'&h Ma!-!ad"'>*/.

?1.


12/32

-12-

and in accordance 8ith the Rules and the )a8. for

the#seles and need not ,e repeated here.

?


13/32

-13-

/lace : 7e8 9elhi Madh!" Da#!a$;9ate : 25.11.2013 Applicant

VERIFICATION

4 "adhuri 9a,ral4 9o *hri F./. 9a,ral4 aed a,out $ years4

A 7on-Hunctional *election Irade !fficer of the ndian /ostal

*erice4 9irector no8lede and that hae not suppressed concealed any #aterial

fact there fro#.

/lace : 7e8 9elhi Madh!" Da#!a$;9ate : 25.11.2013 Applicant

Hiled throuh

Sa'a a! Da*;Adocate for the Applicant

To,Th) R)>"*(!a!,C)'(!a$ Ad"'"*(!a(";) T!"#'a$,P!"'&"%a$ B)'&h,N): D)$h".


14/32

-14-

A'')9!) 4 A71=


15/32

-15-

Th"* A'')9!) "* a (!) &o% o+ (h) o!">"'a$


16/32

-16-

A'')9!) 4 A71< Co$$/

Th"* A'')9!) "* a (!) &o% o+ (h) o!">"'a$


17/32

-17-

A'')9!) 4 A71< Co$$/

Th"* A'')9!) "* a (!) &o% o+ (h) o!">"'a$


18/32

-18-

A'')9!) 4 A71< Co$$/

Th"* A'')9!) "* a (!) &o% o+ (h) o!">"'a$


19/32

-19-

A'')9!) 4 A71< Co$$/

S)) Pa>) No. 2? o+ OA/

Th"* A'')9!) "* a (!) &o% o+ (h) o!">"'a$


20/32

-20-

A'')9!) 4 A71< Co$$/


21/32

-21-


22/32

-22-

Th"* A'')9!) "* a (!) &o% o+ (h) o!">"'a$


23/32

-23-

A'')9!) 4 A71@


24/32

-24-


25/32

-25-


26/32

-26-

Th"* A'')9!) "* a (!) &o% o+ (h) o!">"'a$


27/32

-27-

A'')9!) 4 A71

UOTATIONS FROM 6UD-MENTS RE-ARDIN- NON7

APPLICATION OF MIND

1. e to refer to thejud#ent in !mperor "# $ibnath %anerji4 AR 1$5 /C 15(4 8hereinthe =o#e *ecretary extended period of detention on thereco##endation of /olice Authority. a on 13.0&.$(4 under section 32; of the *pecial/o8ers Act.


28/32

-28-

Ghen the Ioern#ent passed the !rder of Dxtension of 9etentionon 1&.0&.1$$( it 8as a total a,surdity of facts and clear iolation ofsection 33; of the *pecial /o8ers Act. *o4 it 8as held that thedetention order is lia,le to ,e struc> do8n on the round of totalnon-application of #ind.

=. s of account and other docu#ents d; issuin co##issionsand e; i#poundin of ,oo>s. *uch po8ers are ested in t8odifferent cateories of officers under its *u,-*ections 1; and 1-A;.As the a,oe po8ers are exercised for collectin infor#ation a,outa tareted assessee4 these po8ers pass the test of ,ein assessee-

specific.

proceedins under section 1%.

@.


29/32

-29-

or third person4 althouh so#e of the# #ay not hae the re#otest,earin on #atters coered ,y the Act4 8ent to sho8 that there 8asno due application of #ind ,y the authority concerned and such anorder could not ,e passed or supported.

.


30/32

-30-

detention was made# These facts have not been deniedin the counter-affidavit filed by the respondents# *n factwe are unable to find anything in the records producedbefore us2 either in the police dossier submitted to the,istrict +agistrate for action or in any other document

forming part of the record that the ,istrict +agistratewas aware that the petitioner was already in custody#There is nothing to indicate that the ,istrict +agistrateapplied his mind to the 4uestion whether an order ofdetention under the &ammu . ashmir $afety Act wasnecessary despite the fact that the petitioner wasalready in custody in connection with the criminal case#The cases of the other six petitioners are identical andin the circumstances2 we have no option2 but to directtheir release forthwith2 unless they are wanted in

connection with some other case or cases#

5. iabad ?ila $ah(ari %an( @td# v# Additional @abourCommissioner and 'thers4 6< 200% 2; *C 5((4 200% 2; *CA)D1(54 200%; 11 *CC %5(4 200%' 1 *CR 100%4 8here Reulation 2of the Reulations4 1$%5 8as in Euestion.


31/32

-31-

8# *n view of the aforesaid provision2 it is crystalclear that for giving pecuniary benefits or allowances tothe employees governed by the aforesaid Regulations2892 the Registrar5s general or special order isnecessary and if the particular Cooperative $ociety

wants to grant the benefit2 then it can be given onlywith the permission of the Registrar# Admittedly2 in thepresent case2 no permission was ever sought from theRegistrar2 rather on the contrary2 action was ta(encontrary to the circulars issued by the Registrar2Cooperative $ocieties2 3#P# issued from time to time2prohibiting payment of ex-gratia in this regard#

1# *n view of the aforesaid legal provisions and thereply furnished by the petitioner2 the Respondent No# 8

had no jurisdiction to adjudicate the matter ofemployees with regard to the payment of ex-gratiaamount which runs contrary to the Regulation ;1 of the$ervice Regulations2 89 as well as the Circularsissued by the Registrar2 Cooperative $ocieties2 3#P# andthe Additional Registrar F%an(ingG2 Cooperative$ocieties 3#P# and the only forum for adjudication forsa(e of arguments and without admitting that thematter ought to have been referred to the @abour Courtfor adjudicating the aforesaid matter2 and that too2 if

the *ndustrial @aws are made applicable to theprovisions of 3#P# Cooperative $ocieties Act2 897#

0# *n our opinion2 the impugned judgmentsuffers from complete non-application of mindonthe merits of the case in as much as whole pleadingseven before the @abour Commissioner or before the


32/32

-32-

prior permission of the Registrar Co-operative $ocietiesfor grant of any pecuniary benefits because Regulation;1 of the 3#P# Cooperative $ocieties !mployees $erviceRegulations 89 provides that any allowance orpecuniary benefits to employees shall be given only by

the special order of the Registrar Cooperative $ocieties23#P# which order was missing throughout#

Th"* A'')9!) "* a (!) &o% o+ (h) o!">"'a$

Documents

4 - O.A No. 2201/2013 CAT Principle Bench, New Delhi