ATMA RAM Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Relying upon a Division Bench judgment of this Court in the case of H.P. Agro Industries Corporation Ltd. and others v. Raj Kumar and another, reported in Latest HLJ 2001 (H.P) 1178, the learned H.P. Administrative Tribunal vide judgment dated 13th July, 2004 passed in OA No. 2728 of 2003 has dismissed the case of the petitioner on the ground that it did not have the jurisdiction in the matter but at the same time reserved liberty to the petitioner to avail of the alternative remedy under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 by approaching the Industrial Tribunal or the Labour Court, as the case may be.

(2.) We have very carefully perused the aforesaid Division Bench judgment of this Court in H.P. Agro Industries Corporation Ltd. and others v. Raj Kumar and others (supra) and find that in that case the Division Bench was seized of the controversy relating to the jurisdiction of the Administrative Tribunal with respect of the adjudication of an order terminating the service of an employee of H.P. Agro Industries Corporation Ltd. In the present case, the petitioner had approached the Tribunal seeking the relief of his being conferred the status of a workcharge employee on the ground that he was engaged as a daily wager Beldar in the year 1990 and he having already put in more than 10 years of service was entitled to be conferred the aforesaid status of a workcharge employee.

(3.) The jurisdiction, powers and authority of a State Administrative Tribunal have been laid down in Section 15 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985. This Section specifically says and lays down that a State Administrative Tribunal shall inter alia have jurisdiction with respect to all service matters. The expression "service matters" has been defined in Section 3(q) of the 1985 Act. This definition reads thus: - 3(q) "service matters", in relation to a person, means all matters relating to the conditions of his service in connection with the affairs of the Union or of any State or of any local or other authority within the territory of India or under the control of the Government of India, or, as the case may be, of any corporation [or society] owned or controlled by the Government, as respects: - (i) remuneration (including allowances), pension and other retirement benefits; (ii) tenure including confirmation, seniority, promotion, reversion, premature retirement and superannuation; (iii) leave of any kind; (iv) disciplinary matters; or (v) any other matter whatsoever;" Undoubtedly, the aforesaid relief claimed by the petitioner in the OA filed by him before the Tribunal came within the ambit and purview of the aforesaid definition of "service matters". Whether we talk of regularisation on the tenure, including confirmation, promotion or the like nature, undoubtedly the relief claimed by the petitioner has a direct nexus and a close link with the concept of "service matters" as has been elaborately defined in Section 3(q) of 1985 Act.