Calcutta HC verdict setting apart CAT order ‘disturbing’: Centre to SC

The Centre instructed the Supreme Court on Monday that the Calcutta High Court has handed a “disturbing order” whereas setting apart an order of the principal bench of CAT to switch an utility by former West Bengal chief secretary Alapan Bandopadhyay, difficult the proceedings initiated towards him by the Centre, from Kolkata to New Delhi.

The authorities instructed a bench of Justices A M Khanwilkar and C T Ravikumar that the October 29 order of the excessive courtroom was “disturbing”, each on the query of territorial jurisdiction in addition to some observations made within the order.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, showing for the Centre, instructed the bench that problem pertaining to territorial jurisdiction in issues the place an officer, after retirement, can petition any excessive courtroom to problem an order of the principal bench of Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) on the bottom that he resides in that exact state, has wider ramifications.

“This has wider ramification and can be abused. A person, merely by claiming that I ordinarily stay there, can confer jurisdiction to the high court, though territorially, the high court would not have jurisdiction.” Mehta instructed the bench.

“This is a disturbing order, both on the question of territorial jurisdiction of the high court and some observations which are made. It’s really disturbing,” he stated on the outset.

The high courtroom was listening to a plea filed by the Centre towards the excessive courtroom order, which had additionally directed the Kolkata bench of CAT to expedite the listening to of Bandopadhyay’s utility and eliminate it on the earliest.

Bandopadhyay had moved the Kolkata bench of CAT, difficult the proceedings initiated towards him by the Ministry of Personnel and Public Grievance and Pensions in a matter referring to attending a gathering on May 28 on the Kalaikunda Air Force station that was chaired by Prime Minister Narendra Modi to debate the results of cyclone Yaas.

Mehta instructed the apex courtroom that Bandopadhyay had challenged the initiation of departmental motion towards him by the Centre earlier than the Calcutta bench of CAT.

Referring to the excessive courtroom order, the legislation officer stated some “very disturbing” remarks have been made towards the principal bench of CAT.

“We can say that the disturbing remarks will be expunged,” the bench noticed.

Mehta stated the Calcutta High Court would don’t have any jurisdiction in an order handed by the principal bench of CAT in Delhi.

“The question is can Calcutta High Court take up that matter and set it aside.” he stated, including, “The Delhi High Court may have set it aside.”

The bench noticed that the continuing, which had been more likely to be impacted by the order of the CAT’s principal bench, was filed in Calcutta.

It stated the primary continuing is filed in Kolkata by Bandhopadhyay and the order handed by the CAT principal bench will affect these proceedings, so a part of the motion arose in Kolkata which is throughout the jurisdiction of the Calcutta High Court.

The apex courtroom stated the excessive courtroom has proceeded on the premise that for the reason that officer shouldn’t be in service now, he can file the plea on the place the place he resides.

The solicitor common stated the observations made by the excessive courtroom are disturbing and when constitutional courts made such remarks, it turn into vital.

“As the highest court of the country, I urge your lordships to take cognisance of this,” he stated, including that he would help the apex courtroom on the difficulty of territorial jurisdiction in addition to on the usage of language.

He stated an officer can file a petition within the Sikkim High Court saying he ordinarily stays there and get the order handed by CAT’s principal bench put aside.

When Mehta stated that the apex courtroom ought to look at this side, the bench stated it should hold that query open.

The bench posted the matter for listening to on November 22 and granted liberty to the counsel showing for the events to file written observe, accompanying reported determination on which they may rely throughout the arguments.

Bandopadhyay, who was not launched by the state authorities, selected to retire on May 31, his authentic date of superannuation previous to having been given an extension of three months from that date.

Proceedings had been initiated towards Bandopadhyay by the Union authorities and an inquiry authority was appointed on this regard, which mounted a preliminary listening to on October 18 in New Delhi.

The petitioner then moved the Kolkata bench of the CAT, difficult the proceedings towards him.

The Union authorities had filed a switch petition earlier than the principal bench of CAT, which on October 22 allowed the switch of Bandopadhyay’s utility to itself in New Delhi.

This order was challenged by Bandopadhyay earlier than the Calcutta High Court.