Union of India Vs. Sh. Rasila Ram & Ors.
EmailAppeal: Civil Appeal No. 1301-04 of 1990
Petitioner: Union of India
Respondent: Sh. Rasila Ram & Ors.
Apeal: Civil Appeal No. 1301-04 of 1990
Judges: G.B. PATTANAIK & U.C. BANERJEE, JJ.
Date of Judgment: Jun 09, 2000
Head Note:
SERVICE LAWS
Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985
Sections 3(q) and 33 – Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 – Administrative Tribunal – Jurisdiction – “Service matters” – If it includes eviction of unauthorised occupant of Government flat under the Public Premises Act, 1971. Held, Administrative Tribunals have no jurisdiction to go into the legality of the order passed by a competent authority under the Public Premises Act of 1971. Tribunal’s order holding that an order passed by the competent authority under the 1971. Act would also come within its jurisdiction, therefore invalid and without jurisdiction. Order accordingly set aside.
JUDGEMENT:
ORDER
1. The aforesaid appeals are directed against the order of the Full Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal in a batch of applications before it, recording a finding that an order passed by the competent authority under the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 for eviction would also come within the purview and jurisdiction of the Administrative Tribunal constituted under Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985. The Tribunal by the impugned order has construed the expression ‘service matter’ defined in Section 3 (q) of the Administrative Tribunals Act and because of the expression ‘any other matter whatsoever’ occurring in Clause (v) thereof, it has come to the conclusion that the eviction of unauthorised occupants from
the Government quarter, would tantamount to a service matter, and therefore,
Tribunal retains jurisdiction over the same, in view of the overriding effect given to the Act by virtue of Section 33 of the said Act.
2. The Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants ) Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as the “Eviction Act”) was enacted for eviction of unauthorised occupants from public premises. To attract the said provisions, it must be held that the premises was a public premises, as defined under the said Act, and the occupants must be held unauthorised occupants, as defined under the said Act. Once, a Government servant is held to be in occupation of a public premises as an unauthorised occupant within the meaning of Eviction Act, and appropriate orders are passed thereunder, the remedy to such occupants lies, as provided under the said Act. By no stretch of imagination the expression, “any other matter,” in Section 3(q)(v) of the Administrative Act would confer jurisdiction on the Tribunal to go into the legality of the order passed by the competent authority under the provisions of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971. In this view of the matter, the impugned assumption of jurisdiction by the Tribunal, over an order passed by the competent authority under the Eviction Act, must be held to be invalid and without jurisdiction. This order of the Tribunal accordingly stands set aside. The appeals are accordingly allowed.
1. The aforesaid appeals are directed against the order of the Full Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal in a batch of applications before it, recording a finding that an order passed by the competent authority under the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 for eviction would also come within the purview and jurisdiction of the Administrative Tribunal constituted under Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985. The Tribunal by the impugned order has construed the expression ‘service matter’ defined in Section 3 (q) of the Administrative Tribunals Act and because of the expression ‘any other matter whatsoever’ occurring in Clause (v) thereof, it has come to the conclusion that the eviction of unauthorised occupants from
the Government quarter, would tantamount to a service matter, and therefore,
Tribunal retains jurisdiction over the same, in view of the overriding effect given to the Act by virtue of Section 33 of the said Act.
2. The Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants ) Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as the “Eviction Act”) was enacted for eviction of unauthorised occupants from public premises. To attract the said provisions, it must be held that the premises was a public premises, as defined under the said Act, and the occupants must be held unauthorised occupants, as defined under the said Act. Once, a Government servant is held to be in occupation of a public premises as an unauthorised occupant within the meaning of Eviction Act, and appropriate orders are passed thereunder, the remedy to such occupants lies, as provided under the said Act. By no stretch of imagination the expression, “any other matter,” in Section 3(q)(v) of the Administrative Act would confer jurisdiction on the Tribunal to go into the legality of the order passed by the competent authority under the provisions of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971. In this view of the matter, the impugned assumption of jurisdiction by the Tribunal, over an order passed by the competent authority under the Eviction Act, must be held to be invalid and without jurisdiction. This order of the Tribunal accordingly stands set aside. The appeals are accordingly allowed.
