The introduction of the 42nd Constitution Amendment Act, 1976 has added Article 323A to the Constitution of India. This takes the adjudication of disputes relating to the recruitment and conditions of service of persons appointed to public services or posts of the Union and of the states out of the hands of the Civil Courts and High Courts and put them into those of the Administrative Tribunals for the Union or for the States
Pursuant to this provision of Article 323A the Administrative Tribunal Act 1985 has been enacted by Parliament to set up a Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT)-with branches in specified cities- for meeting the above objective. CAT provides for the adjudication or trial by Administrative Tribunals of disputes and complaints with respect to recruitment and conditions of service of persons appointed to public services and posts in connection with the affairs of the Union or employees of the Union in any state or of any local or other authorities within the territory of India which is under the control of the Government of India or of any corporation or society owned or controlled by the Government and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.
The object of enacting the Administrative Tribunal Act was:
(i) torelieve congestion in the courts and
(ii) to provide for speedier disposal of disputes relating to service matters than can be done in the courts.
However, disputes relating to members of the defence forces, officers and servants of the Supreme Courts, and members of the secretarial staff of Parliament of any legislature of the state or Union Territory do not fall within the jurisdiction of these Tribunals.
The Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 takes away the jurisdiction of a civil court to entertain a suit. The State Administrative Tribunals have been vested with all the jurisdiction, on and from the appointed day, with the powers and authority exercisable immediately before that day by all courts ( except the Supreme Court) in relation to:
(i) recruitment, and matters concerning recruitment, to any civil service of the state or to any civil post under the state;
(ii) all services of the state or any civil post under the state and pertaining to the service of such person in connection with the affairs of the state or any local or other authority under the control of the state government or of any corporation or society owned or controlled by the state government;
(iii) all service matters pertaining to service in connection with the affairs of the state concerning a person appointed to any service or post referred to in clause (ii), being a person whose services have been placed with any such local or other authority or corporation or society or other body controlled or owned by the state government.
The State Administrative Tribunals are meant for dispute in regard to state service and they cannot entertain any matter which is entertainable by the Central Administrative Tribunal.
These Tribunals cannot exercise any jurisdiction or power to entertain any petition:
(i) that questions are grounds of satisfaction of the President or the Governor of the state under clause (c) of the second proviso to Article 311(2); and /or
(ii) that goes into the merits of an administrative determination in the absence of malafides, arbitrariness, colourable exercise of power or exercise of power without jurisdiction or a finding without any evidence at all.
Pursuant to this provision of Article 323A the Administrative Tribunal Act 1985 has been enacted by Parliament to set up a Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT)-with branches in specified cities- for meeting the above objective. CAT provides for the adjudication or trial by Administrative Tribunals of disputes and complaints with respect to recruitment and conditions of service of persons appointed to public services and posts in connection with the affairs of the Union or employees of the Union in any state or of any local or other authorities within the territory of India which is under the control of the Government of India or of any corporation or society owned or controlled by the Government and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.
The object of enacting the Administrative Tribunal Act was:
(i) torelieve congestion in the courts and
(ii) to provide for speedier disposal of disputes relating to service matters than can be done in the courts.
However, disputes relating to members of the defence forces, officers and servants of the Supreme Courts, and members of the secretarial staff of Parliament of any legislature of the state or Union Territory do not fall within the jurisdiction of these Tribunals.
The Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 takes away the jurisdiction of a civil court to entertain a suit. The State Administrative Tribunals have been vested with all the jurisdiction, on and from the appointed day, with the powers and authority exercisable immediately before that day by all courts ( except the Supreme Court) in relation to:
(i) recruitment, and matters concerning recruitment, to any civil service of the state or to any civil post under the state;
(ii) all services of the state or any civil post under the state and pertaining to the service of such person in connection with the affairs of the state or any local or other authority under the control of the state government or of any corporation or society owned or controlled by the state government;
(iii) all service matters pertaining to service in connection with the affairs of the state concerning a person appointed to any service or post referred to in clause (ii), being a person whose services have been placed with any such local or other authority or corporation or society or other body controlled or owned by the state government.
The State Administrative Tribunals are meant for dispute in regard to state service and they cannot entertain any matter which is entertainable by the Central Administrative Tribunal.
These Tribunals cannot exercise any jurisdiction or power to entertain any petition:
(i) that questions are grounds of satisfaction of the President or the Governor of the state under clause (c) of the second proviso to Article 311(2); and /or
(ii) that goes into the merits of an administrative determination in the absence of malafides, arbitrariness, colourable exercise of power or exercise of power without jurisdiction or a finding without any evidence at all.
0 comments: