(1.) The matter brings out the sometimes atrocious quality of adjudication in the quasi-judicial tribunal system that is the flavour of the day in this country.
(2.) This is the fifth or sixth round of litigation between the same parties and a relatively simple issue as to whether or not the respondent employees in this case are entitled to the same benefits as Translators in the Central Secretariat has not been conclusively decided over a protracted period of time.
(3.) The judgment and order impugned in this case is dated March 15, 2019 and runs into five pages after discounting the cause-title pages. In the eight paragraphs of the order spread over five pages, the first five paragraphs narrate the history of the litigation before the sixth and seventh paragraphs indicate the result, without any modicum of the adjudication that ought to have been undertaken apparent therefrom, apart from the careless manner in which it is expressed: