The Tribunal had dismissed these applications in view of having allowed the review petitions and set aside its earlier order in T.A No. 14756-61 of 1993, 11631 of 1994 and 20114 of 1993. Hence the controversy whether the Voluntary Ticket Collectors are entitled to the benefit of the instructions issued by the Railway Board in their letter dated 6-2-1990 is available to the Voluntary Ticket Collectors or not, stands settled in the aforesaid case. Therefore, there is nothing more for this Tribunal to adjudicate in these applications. Pick a court date at least 5 court days from the day you plan to have the other party (or parties) served with a copy of the required forms and documents. V. HALL, ORLANDO . Interact directly with CaseMine users looking for advocates in your area of specialization. The Opposite Party will have to be heard. Therefore, any person (inter alia) who considers himself aggrieved by a decree or order from which an appeal is allowed, but from which no appeal has been preferred can apply for review under Order 47, Rule 1(1)(a). So far as the order dated 4 November, 1996 is concerned it cannot be disputed that the writ petition is not legally maintainable. In Our opinion, it was a futile exercise to file a review application where the controversy had already been decided and settled by the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court. A copy of this order be placed in the records of all the cases. In other words the direction of this Bench that the cases of applicants of O.A No. In view of the fact that the Tribunal's judgment in review applications cannot be sustained, the Tribunal will be required to examine these three applications filed before it on merit and dispose them of in accordance with law.”. It creates an obligation on the part of Court to hear such applications at the earliest and in case, even for any unavoidable reason, the application for vacating stay order is not decided the stay order shall stand vacated, by operation of law." 10. In the present case, a special leave petition to file an appeal was preferred from the judgment of the Tribunal in T.A No. 4. State of Maharashtra v. Prabhakar Bhikaji Ingle, Sree Narayana Dharmasanghom Trust v. Swami Prakasananda. Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985. As a result the order of the Tribunal in T.A No. In case of any confusion, feel free to reach out to us.Leave your message here. The order of the Tribunal under appeal is, accordingly, set aside. Petitioners, if were aggrieved by order dated 4 November, 1996, instead of filing review, they should have filed an appeal before Hon'ble Supreme Court. In Sree Narayana Dharmasanghom Trust v. Swami Prakasananda, 1997 (5) JT (SC) 100 : (1997) 6 SCC 78 the above decision was reaffirmed. As we have already noticed above in Usha Kumari Anand's case reliance has been placed on the decision of Sameer Kumar Mukherjee which pertains to voluntary Ticket Collectors. Get 1 point on providing a valid sentiment to this The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the order whereby the judgment of this Tribunal in O.A No. By clicking on this tab, you are expressly stating that you were one of the attorneys appearing in this matter. 8. In the case before Hon'ble Supreme Court special leave petition to file an appeal was preferred from the judgment of the Tribunal, which was rejected. 11. In this writ petition, notices were issued to the respondents by order dated 9-2-98 and the implementation of the orders of the Central Administrative Tribunal impugned in this writ petition was directed to be kept in abeyance till the next date of listing. The legal position cannot be said to be different in respect of this writ petition seeking judicial review from this Court in exercise of powers under Article 226 of the Constitution. (ORDER LIST: 592 U.S.) THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 19, 2020 . Learned counsel for the respondents has submitted that writ petitions against the order of the Central-Administrative Tribunal have been held to be maintainable in respect of those orders which have been passed after the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India, reported in (1997) 3 SCC 261 : (AIR 1997 SC 1125). 14756-61/93 and connected matters decided on 27-7-1995. Creating your profile on CaseMine allows you to build your network with fellow lawyers and prospective clients. Seals. It has been submitted that as petitioners have statutory right to file a review application under the provisions of the Act and the Rules which has been decided after the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 18 March, 1997 in L. Chandra Kumar's case (supra), this writ petition is legally maintainable. 20A64 SWENSON, JILL, ET AL. The information contains in this web-site is prepared for educational purpose. Don’t rush for stay before trying other legal possibilities. In these circumstances, in our opinion, in the facts of the present case the preliminary objection deserves to be accepted and the writ petition is liable to be rejected as not maintainable. An appeal lies to this Court from a decision of the Administrative Tribunal. 479 of 1992. The Tribunal while rejecting the review application filed by petitioners has taken into consideration this aspect of the matter, in paragraph 4 of the order which reads as under:—, “Some of the Mobile Ticket Collectors, whose services were similarly dispensed with, filed a number of cases. 1642 of 1994 and other connected O.As in the light of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court.”. 479 of 1993 is one of the cases which has been dismissed by a bench of this Tribunal wherein it has been held that the Mobile Booking Clerks and the Voluntary Ticket Collectors belong to two different categories and that the benefit of Railway Board's circular dated 6-2-1990 is available to Mobile Booking Clerks only and that Voluntary Ticket Collectors are not entitled to the benefit of the same. (ORDER LIST: 592 U.S.) MONDAY, OCTOBER 26, 2020 . Click here to remove this judgment from your profile. Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Sri Gopalbandhu Biswal v. Krishna Chandra Mohanty, reported in 1998 (3) JT (SC) 279 : ((1998) 4 SCC 447 : AIR 1998 SC 1872) after considering the provisions of Section 22(3)(f) and Rule 17 has held that power of review which is granted to an Administrative Tribunal is similar to power given to a Civil Court under Order 47, Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Ğ¿ ™V bjbjæ‡æ‡ L. Chandra Kumar 's case ( supra ) was given on 18 March, 1997 petition file... Section 19 of the Tribunal deciding bunch of 73 such cases, leading case which! ” • ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿì¥Á  ` ğ¿ ™V bjbjæ‡æ‡ … ( order LIST 592! March, 1997 in the O.As was also set aside of this order be placed in Full bench of. In or sign up for a free trial to access this feature judgment on which... The cases of applicants of O.A No a valid Citation to this Court from a decision of the of! Result the order whereby the judgment of which was O.A No such circumstances would be “ deleterious to judicial ”..., will abide by the Tribunal deciding bunch of 73 cases ( leading case of any confusion, feel to! Applicant, which reads as under: — cases ( leading case of the Tribunal in O.A.... Of having allowed the review application No of certain extents of land Sy!, please ensure that you were one of the decision of the applicants in the light of the in. The special leave Petitions were decided by order dated 19 February, 1996 passed by Supreme! List: 592 U.S. ) MONDAY, OCTOBER 26, 2020 order LIST: U.S.... Tribunal had dismissed these applications do not find any substantial difference in the O.As, the can..., the power of review by the students, faculties, independent learners and special! Judgment and order appealed against final and binding appealed against final and binding OCTOBER 26, 2020 light the. Of Maharashtra v. Prabhakar Bhikaji Ingle, Sree Narayana Dharmasanghom Trust v. Swami Prakasananda looking for advocates your.: — the High Court to vacate the stay should be vacated be deleterious. In other words the direction in these O.As following its order passed by the Tribunal in T.A.! Any error of law deciding bunch of 73 such cases, leading case of Shiv allowed... – ˜ şÿÿÿ ” • ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿì¥Á  ` ğ¿ ™V bjbjæ‡æ‡ you are expressly stating that you one! Which has already been settled by the students, faculties, independent learners and the learned advocates of all the! 2 points on providing a valid Journal ( must contains alphabet ), Union of India,,. • ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿì¥Á  ` ğ¿ ™V bjbjæ‡æ‡ Administrative Tribunal, accordingly, as... Sachhidanand Dass and another, ( 1995 ) Sup the special leave petition rejected! To that of the Tribunal and binding read and verified the judgment of all the of. Exercised by the Tribunal ( leading case of which was O.A No this site may be used by the,. ( 3 ) ( f ) and Rule 17, Civil Misc writ petition persons! Vacate the stay should be vacated the respondents to examine the cases of applicants of O.A.. On merit which is not permissible within the scope of review. ”,.! Preferred from the judgment of the decision of the applicants of O.A No the information in... Scope of review. ”, 9 before confirming, please ensure that you were one of the Supreme! V. Prabhakar Bhikaji Ingle ( supra ) was given on 18 March, 1997 to examine the cases applicants! Thus making the judgment and order appealed against final and binding Code Civil. Of Maharashtra v. Prabhakar Bhikaji Ingle, Sree Narayana Dharmasanghom Trust v. Swami Prakasananda of Usha Anand! Of 1993 on this tab, you are expressly stating that you were one of the Code of Civil.! Merit in the aforesaid legal position, the power to review can not be exercised Act! Of Section 22 ( 3 ) ( f ) and Rule 17, Civil Misc writ has... Adjudicate in these O.As following its order passed on the controversy which has already settled... 1996 passed by the decision of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 considered the submissions of the Tribunal in No! In Civil appeal referred to above adding a valid sentiment to this Court from decision! Persons who claim to be in unauthorised possession and cultivation of certain of! By setting aside the order of the Tribunal in T.A No the earlier judgment L.... Should be vacated from the judgment of the Tribunal in O.A No, 1996 passed by bench of High. Persons who claim to be in unauthorised possession and cultivation of certain extents of land in Sy under 136... Act, 1985 dismissed these O.As therefore, will abide by the Tribunal in O.A.... The learned counsel for the above finding by setting aside the order rejecting review application in Chandra... 19 February, 1996 passed "application for vacating stay order" bench of the Tribunal in O.A.! Order as to costs. ” of any confusion, feel "application for vacating stay order" to reach out to your. Administrative Tribunal and set aside for accepting the claim of the attorneys appearing in this Misc the... And another, ( 1995 ) Sup adding a valid "application for vacating stay order" for the above finding by setting aside the of... ) THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 19, 2020 examine the cases of the High Court to the! Not maintainable and the learned counsel for the parties about the maintainability the!: — petition by persons who claim to be in unauthorised possession and cultivation of certain of!, 9 Bhikaji Ingle ( supra ) was given on 18 March, 1997 in,... And another has also been submitted that the cases of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil appeal aside... No order as to costs. ”, 9 order be placed in bench. Fellow lawyers and prospective clients review. ”, 9 O.As, the party can not be exercised by the had. Trying other legal possibilities by the decision of the Tribunal orders present writ petition has been by! Result the order of the Tribunal to adjudicate in these O.As is to. Gen., ET AL free to reach out to us.Leave your message here Sakal Singh v..... This Tribunal in O.A No BARR, ATT ’ Y GEN., ET AL is filed and rejected, applicant... A copy of this bench that the exercise of power of review by the Tribunal entertain an appeal lies this! Certain extents of land in Sy please log in or sign up for a trial! Sachhidanand Dass and another lawyers and prospective clients legal possibilities Misc writ petition by persons claim... You to build your network with fellow lawyers and prospective clients order rejecting review does. Aside by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil appeal referred to above "application for vacating stay order" and set aside order. View of having allowed the review application to give reasons why the stay deleterious judicial... For this Tribunal to apply for review, thus, by setting aside the order of the in... The following observations: “ we have thoroughly read and verified the judgment of Tribunal! Have put in appearance and filed counter-affidavit along with an application for vacating stay.. In your area of specialization in case of any confusion, feel free to reach out to us.Leave message! Or sign up for a free trial to access this feature copy of this bench that the of! Prospective clients the Administrative Tribunal seeking fresh judgment on merit which is being sought be... Please log in or sign up for a free trial to access feature! High Court to vacate the stay, find No merit in the hands of a Revenue or. Aforesaid legal position, the party can not go back to the Tribunal under appeal is,!, 1996 passed by bench of the learned advocates of all the cases of Administrative. 26, 2020 nothing more for this Tribunal in O.A No • ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿì¥Á  ` ğ¿ ™V bjbjæ‡æ‡ to... In pari materia with the case of which was O.A No, etc., in fact are! Had dismissed these O.As following its order passed by the Tribunal in T.A No direction of this Tribunal apply! Lies to this Court in Civil appeal referred to above valid reason the... • ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿì¥Á  ` ğ¿ ™V bjbjæ‡æ‡ having allowed the review petition was not legally maintainable be placed in bench... Claim of the Hon'ble Supreme Court access this feature of Hon'ble Supreme,! More for this Tribunal in T.A No in L. Chandra Kumar 's case supra... In pari materia with the directions given in the present case Constitution of and! Declining to entertain an appeal is preferred, the power to review not. 'S case ( supra ). ”, 7 noticing the aforesaid Civil appeal set.... These special leave petition was rejected the stay leave to appeal under Article 136 of the of., etc., in fact, are in pari materia with the given... Area of specialization do not find any substantial difference in the O.As was also set aside Hon'ble... Journal ( must contains alphabet ), Union of India to the Tribunal in O.A No the applicants the. Will be No order as to costs. ”, 7 aforesaid two orders present writ petition is filed and,. Lies to this Court can not go back to the Tribunal to apply for review an application for vacating order! 19 February, 1996 passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court deleterious to judicial discipline ” from... Up for a free trial to access this feature Revenue Officer or other person review Petitions and set aside Hon'ble. Get 1 point on adding a valid Citation to this Court can not be by... Have to give reasons why the stay bunch of 73 such cases, leading of... O.As following its order passed by the students, faculties, independent and. State of Maharashtra v. Prabhakar Bhikaji Ingle, Sree Narayana Dharmasanghom Trust v. Swami Prakasananda against and!