Poona Ram & Ors. V. Union of India & Ors.

CW/4526/2002

AI Insights

The case involves a writ petition filed by Poona Ram and others against the Union of India concerning an order from the Central Administrative Tribunal's Jabalpur Bench. The Tribunal had issued directions that were contested due to the long-standing rules in place since 1986. The Madhya Pradesh High Court had earlier addressed these issues, noting the appointment of the Prabhu Committee to re-determine the rules and acknowledged the Department's ongoing consideration of the matter. The High Court's decision effectively covered the issues in the current writ petition, leading to its dismissal. The court also allowed for the possibility of the petitioners seeking further remedies if grievances arose from the Department's re-consideration of the matter.

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 811975 (HC-MADHYA_PRADESH)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 10-04-2014
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Central Administrative Tribunal Rules
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: K K BISSA
• Assessee Lawyers: J K KAUSHIK
• Keywords: Central Administrative Tribunal; Civil Writ Petition; Public Interest Litigation; Stenographers; Ministerial Staff; Prabhu Committee
• Section: 837/1997

Judgement Text

"D.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION (PIL) NO. 4526/2002. Poona Ram & Ors. Vs. Union of India & Ors. // 1 // H/9 D.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION (PIL) NO. 4526/2002. Poona Ram & Ors. Vs. Union of India & Ors. .. Date of Order :: 10th April 2014. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BANWARI LAL SHARMA Mr. J.K. Kaushik, for the petitioners. Mr. K.K. Bissa, for the respondents. <<>> BY THE COURT: The learned counsel for the petitioners has frankly pointed out that the petition as was pending before the Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh against the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal at its Jabalpur Bench in Original Application No. 837/1997 had in fact been decided by the said High Court on 04.11.2003. The learned counsel has placed before us for perusal the aforesaid order dated 04.11.2003 wherein, the Court found the Tribunal not justified in issuing the impugned directions particularly when the Rules were in force since the year 1986. The Court, however, also took note of the fact that subsequent to the order passed by the Tribunal, a Committee namely, Prabhu Committee, had been appointed to re-determine the Rules and the Department was seized of the matter. The Court disposed of the petition, while observing that keeping in view the hardship caused to the Stenographers and Ministerial Staff, it would be open to Department to reconsider the matter without reference to the directions made by the Tribunal. The Court said,- D.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION (PIL) NO. 4526/2002. Poona Ram & Ors. Vs. Union of India & Ors. // 2 // “This rule has been in force from the year 1986. The Stenographers' guild has not been made a party. If any order is passed, it will be to the detriment of the Stenographers and that is why the Tribunal did not quash the Rule and on the contrary it gave directions taking into account the hardship faced by the ministerial staff. It is submitted that subsequent to the order passed by the Tribunal, Prabhu Committee has been appointed to re- determine the rules and Income Tax Department is seized of the matter. Keeping in view the hardship caused to Stenographers and Ministerial Staff it would be open to Department to reconsider the matter without reference to the directions made by the Tribunal and the directions of the learned Tribunal were not called for, considering the fact that the rules were in force since 1986. With the aforesaid direction, the petition is disposed of.” The position aforesaid effectively covers the issues sought to be raised in this writ petition; and we are inclined to follow the decision so rendered by the Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court. When the decision aforesaid effectively covers the issues sought to be raised in this matter, this petition is required to be dismissed. However, in the circumstances of the case, we considered it proper to observe that dismissal of this writ petition shall not be of prejudice to the petitioners in taking recourse to the appropriate remedies in accordance with law, in case of any grievance remaining or arising consequent to re-consideration of the matter by the Department, as indicated in the passage reproduced hereinabove. Subject to the observations foregoing, this petition stands dismissed. (BANWARI LAL SHARMA),J. (DINESH MAHESHWARI),J. Mo h a n/ "