Case Brief: Case Brief: Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan & anr v. Subhas Sharma, Appeal (civil) 5448 of 2000, Appeal (civil) 5021 of 2001

Deciding Authority: The Supreme Court of India
Name of the Judges: S.N. Phukan
Date of Judgement: 07/03/2002
Facts:
The appellants are the Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan (for short ’Kendriya Vidyalaya’) and its officials. The respondent No.1 in Civil Appeal No.5021 of 2001 and the sole respondent in Civil Appeal No.5448 of 2000 are the employees of the Kendriya Vidyalaya and as some dispute arose regarding their service conditions, they filed two writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution before the High Court for adjudication. In the above two writ petitions the Kendriya Vidyalaya filed two separate applications for transfer of the writ petitions to the Central Administrative Tribunal on the ground that under the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 (for short ’the Act’) the Tribunal has got jurisdiction to decide the disputes. By the impugned orders, both the applications were dismissed. By order dated January 24, 2002, this Court after hearing the counsels for the parties issued notice to the learned Attorney General of India and the Advocate General of the State of Jammu and Kashmir. The learned Advocate General did not respond. Mr. Altaf Ahmed, learned Additional Solicitor General has appeared on behalf of the learned Attorney General to assist this Court. The High Court relying on a Full Bench decision of the same High Court in Kuldip Khud v. Masud Ahmad Chodhry & Others [1994 JKLR 25] held that the writ court has jurisdiction to decide service disputes of the present nature and, therefore, rejected the prayer for transfer holding that the writ petitions were maintainable. These two appeals are filed by special leave to the Supreme Court.
Judgement:
Mr. Altaf Ahmed, learned counsel appearing for the appellants has drawn the attention of this Court by mentioning clause (a) of sub-section (2) of Section 1 of the Central Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985 which denotes that the Act applies to all categories of central government servants and others posted to work in the State of Jammu and Kashmir as well. Since, the Kendriya Vidyalaya is an autonomous body registered under the Societies Registration Act and controlled by the Government of India and that being the position the Administrative Tribunal has jurisdiction concerning service matters of the employees of the Kendriya Vidyalaya in view of sub-clause (iii) of Section 14(1)(b). Hence, the Central Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985 will apply to Kendriya Vidyalaya. In addition to that the apex Court in L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India held that tribunals set up under the Act shall continue to act as the only courts of first instance ’in respect of areas of law for which they have been constituted’. It was further held that it will not be open for litigants to directly approach the High Court even in cases where they question the vires of statutory legislation (except where the legislation which creates the particular Tribunal is challenged) by overlooking the jurisdiction of the concerned Tribunal.
Decision:
The appeals are allowed. This Court set aside the order of the High Court and transferred both the writ petitions to the Central Administrative Tribunal.
Sudipta Bhowmick, 4th Year, KIIT School of Law.