Full Text
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Decision: 14.01.2022
RAGHAV GUPTA AND ORS. ..... Petitioners
Through Mr Pradeep Dahiya, Adv.
Through Mr Anurag Ahluwalia, CGSC with Mr Danish Faraz Khan, Advs.
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE TALWANT SINGH [Court hearing convened via video-conferencing on account of COVID-19]
RAJIV SHAKDHER, J. (ORAL):-
JUDGMENT
1. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 27.10.2020, passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal [in short, “the Tribunal”] in OA No. 3701/2017.
2. According to Mr Pradeep Dahiya, who appears on behalf of the petitioners, via the impugned order, the Tribunal has disposed of, not only OA No. 3701/2017 but also OA No. 3913/2017.
2.1. Mr Dahiya, in this context, draws our attention to the judgment dated 08.12.2021, passed in the W.P.(C) No.12829/2021. This judgment was rendered by this Court qua the very same impugned order of the Tribunal, albeit in OA No. 3913/2017.
3. Mr Anurag Ahluwalia, who has entered appearance on behalf of the 2022:DHC:197-DB respondents, says that, in view of what has been noticed by this Court, he cannot argue to the contrary.
3.1. Given this circumstance, Mr Ahluwalia says that no formal reply needs to be filed on behalf of the respondents.
4. Therefore, having regard to the record, the writ petition is taken up for hearing and final disposal, at this stage itself.
5. The relevant part of the judgment dated 08.12.2021, referred hereinabove, is extracted hereafter: "1. On 15.11.2021, we had indicated as to, what was problematic with the impugned order dated 27.10.2020 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal [in short “the Tribunal”] in OA NO. 3913/2017, from which the present petition arises. 1.[1] For the sake of convenience, the relevant part of the said order dated 15.11.2021 is extracted hereafter:
2. Mr Ripudaman Bhardwaj, who appears on behalf of the respondents, cannot but accept that, one Bench of the Tribunal i.e., comprising Mohd. Jamshed, Member (A) and Justice L. Narasimha Reddy (Chairman) heard the matter, and the other Bench of the Tribunal i.e., consisting of Justice L. Narasimha Reddy (Chairman) and Ms Aradhana Johri, Member (A) furnished the reasons. 2.[1] To our minds, in an adjudicatory process the person(s) who hear an aggrieved party must decide and render reasons. Concededly, this hasn’t occurred in the instant case; one Bench rendered the decision while the other Bench gave the reasons.
2.2. Therefore the impugned order passed by the Tribunal cannot be sustained.
3. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 27.10.2020, is set aside.
3.1. The matter is remitted to the Tribunal for de novo hearing.
3.2. The petitioners will have the liberty to move the concerned Bench, for an expedited hearing in the matter.
4. The writ petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms." (emphasis is ours)
5.1. To our minds, the same reasoning will apply qua the order impugned in the present writ petition.
6. Accordingly, the order dated 27.10.2020, passed by the Tribunal in OA No. 3701/2017 is set aside.
6.1. The directions contained in the aforesaid judgment dated 08.12.2021 will apply mutatis mutandis in this matter, as well.
7. The writ petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
RAJIV SHAKDHER, J TALWANT SINGH, J JANUARY 14, 2022 Click here to check corrigendum, if any