RASMIRANI SATAPATHY Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

(2.) The grievance of the petitioner in this writ petition is that the Orissa Administrative Tribunal instead of deciding the dispute in question and adjudicating it, directed that the copy of paper book be sent to the opposite parties to consider the grievance of the petitioner. Fact remains that as the petitioner could not get his grievance redressed by his authority, he has approached the Tribunal. This Court held in many occasions that the practice is not in conformity with the statutory provision of Administrative Tribunal Act and against the objection of the constitution of the Tribunal. In case of Dr. Prafulla Kumar Sahoo v. State of Orissa and two others, 2009 (II) OLR 709, this Court held as follows : "It is due to failure on the part of the Administrative Authority to give justice to such claim of persons, who were in Govt, service, the legislatures thought it proper to enact the Administrative Tribunal Act, and the Administrative Tribunals were created and another reason for the same is to reduce the burden of the High Court which was flooded with cases relating to service matters. From the action of the tribunal in sending back the matter to the Government, it appears that the administrative tribunal is acting like a Post Office and not adjudicating the case as the statute demand".

(3.) Thereafter, our attention was drawn to the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of State of West Bengal v. Subhas Kumar Chatterjee and others, AIR 2010 Supreme Court 2927. Paragraph-23 of the said judgment is quoted herein below:- "Whether the Administrative Tribunal can delegate its power of judicial review and confer the same upon a Chief Engineer ? The Tribunals cannot travel beyond the power conferred on them and delegate their essential function and duty to decided service related disputes. Such delegation is ab initio void. It is too elementary to re-state that no judicial tribunal can delegate its responsibilities except where it is authorized to do so expressly. The power conferred upon the Administrative Tribunals under the provisions of the said Act flows from Article 323-A of the Constitution. Such power can never be delegated except under a valid law made by parliament. The Tribunals by their own act cannot delegate the power to decide any dispute which in law is required to be decided exclusively by such Tribunals."