D BIJU Vs. KALADHARAN P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Smt. Shameena Salahudeen appears for respondents 1 to 3. Adv. B. Rajesh appears for respondents 4 to 7 and Adv. M.A. Jisna appears for 8th respondent.

(2.) We heard the learned counsel appearing on either side at the stage of admission itself. The petitioner was de-categrised and absorbed as Office Superintendent, Mechanical Department as per order dated 23-12-2019 (Annexure-A1) issued by the Divisional office, Personnel Branch, Thiruvananthapuram. Four others were also de-categorised and absorbed in various other Departments. The applicants in O.A No.180/30/2020 approached the Central Administrative Tribunal inter alia challenging the decategorisation / absorption of Binulal. In the petition they also sought for a stay to the extent of posting the 5th respondent (Sri. Binulal) as Junior Clerk in the Electrical Department. According to them if such a posting is given to Binulal it will affect their seniority in the concerned Department. However, though limited stay was sought for by the applicants, by order dated 10-01- 2020 (Ext.P3) Annexure-A1 dated 23-12-2019 was stayed by issuing a direction that Annexure-A1 should not be given effect until the next posting date. The case was posted for instruction on 31-01-2020. It appears that interim order continued as such. In view of the interim order passed by the Tribunal the petitioner was not given the posting in the absorbed post, whereas he was asked to remain in the earlier post itself as per Ext.P4 order dated 01-07-2020. The petitioner therefore filed a separate original application, O.A. No.180/303/2020 challenging the said order. At that time it was brought to notice of the petitioner that the Tribunal had already passed an order staying Annexure-A1, as a result of which his absorption was also stayed. The petitioner filed an application to implead himself in OA No.180/30/2020 and also filed an application to vacate the interim order. The Railway administration also filed an application to vacate the said interim order. However, the Tribunal without hearing the matter, directed status-quo to be maintained and the case is now posted to 23-10-2020.

(3.) Apparently this is a case in which a mistake had been committed by the Tribunal in issuing an interim order which is not sought for by the applicant. As rightly pointed out by the counsel appearing on either side the interim order was sought only for the purpose of staying absorption of Binulal, the 5th respondent. But without referring to the same the Tribunal had stayed the Annexure-A1 as such, which resulted in the Department issuing Ext.P4 dated 01-07-2020. Therefore, at least when an application was filed to vacate the interim order the Tribunal should have taken immediate steps to ensure that justice was done in the matter. Whereas, the Tribunal had now proceeded to list the case on a future date for hearing.