RAM CHANDRA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BOTH these writ petitions are disposed of by this common order as the same are arising out of the impugned common judgment and order dated 28. 4. 2000 (Annex. 13) passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jodhpur Bench, Jodhpur (for short 'cat' ).

(2.) THERE is chequered history behind these matters. The cases of both the petitioners were earlier decided by the single member of the CAT on 17. 10. 97. Against which 2 separate writ petitions were preferred by the present petitioners being 4507/97 and 4506/97, respectively. When those matters came up before the division bench, it was submitted that as per the rules of business, single member of the CAT cannot decide the matters pertaining to termination of casual labours. It was to be decided by 2 members of the Tribunal. That was the requirement under the provisions of the Central Administrative Tribunal Act itself. In view of that without going into the merits of the case, the division bench of this Court set aside the order passed by the single member of the CAT and remanded the matters to the CAT with a direction that 2 members of the CAT shall decide the same in accordance with law as early as possible.

(3.) FROM the impugned common judgment and order dated 28. 4. 2000, it appears to us that the members of the Tribunal did not tike the order, therefore, in para 3 of the order, it has been stated that, by an order dated 4. 12. 96 passed by the Chairman, it was ordered that the cases relating to Casual Labours has been added in the Schedule as entry no. 14 which could be disposed of by a single member. The said order of the Chairman was also quoted in it. It is unfortunate that this aspect of the matter was not brought to the notice of the division bench of this Court at the time of passing of the order. Neither the single member who passed the earlier order never stated so in its order.