C.S. BALAN AND ORS.versusCHIEF GENERAL MANAGER, TELECOM AND ORS.
- Citation
- 1996 INSC 587
- Decided
- 26 April 1996
- Disposal
- Disposed off
- Bench
- G N RAYB L HANSARIA
Holding
The appeal is allowed and the matter is remitted to the Central Administrative Tribunal to consider the promotion claim.
Summary
The appellants, C.S. Balan and others, applied to the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) seeking a declaration that they were entitled to promotion to Junior Telecommunication Officer effective December 1990, citing available vacancies in their quota. The CAT order merely noted the respondent's concession that the appellants would be given due seniority, without addressing the promotion claim. The appellants appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that the promotion issue was not considered. The Court held that the CAT erred by not examining the promotion claim and allowed the appeal, directing the Tribunal to hear the promotion application within four months of the order. No costs were awarded.
Issues considered
- Whether the Central Administrative Tribunal erred by not considering the appellants' claim for promotion and only noting a concession of seniority.
- Whether the appellate court can remit the matter back to the Tribunal for consideration of the promotion claim.
Subjects
Judgment
C.S. BALAN AND ORS. A
v.
CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER, TELECOM AND ORS.
APRIL 26, 1996
[G.N. RAY AND B.L. HANSARIA, JJ.] B
Service Law :
Promotion-To the post of Junior Telecommunication Officer from out
of quota-Vacancies availabl&-Not promoted-Central Administrative C
Tribunal 11ot goi11g into that questio11-011ly orderi11g that seniority be
given-Matter remitted to Tribunal for considering the claim of appella11ts to
get promotion from earlier date.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 8907/96.
D
From the Judgment and order dated 28.11.94/2.12.94 of Central
Administrative Tribunal, Ernakulam in O.A. No. 1327/93.
G. Prakash for the Appellants.
V.R. Reddy, Additional Solicitor General, Hemanshu Sharma and E
C.V.S. Rao for the Respondents.
The following Order of the Court was delivered :
Leave granted.
Heard learned counsel for the parties. The appellant's grievance is
F
that before the General Administrative Tribunal, Ernakulam Bench, the
appellants sought for a declaration that they were entitled to be promoted
w.e.f. December, 1990 to the post of Junior Telecom Officer because
vacancies in the quota, in which they were entitled to be promoted, were
available. It, however, appears from the impugned order that the question G
/-. of the appellants' entitlement to get promotion has not been gone into, but
the application has been disposed of by noting the concession of the
respondent that the appellants would be given due seniority. Since the
claim for promotion is also required to be considered, we allow this appeal
and remit the matter to the Tribunal for consideration of the claim of the H
65
66 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996] SUPP. 2 S.C.R.
A appellants to get promotion from earlier date as sought to be agitated in
the application presented before the Tribunal. In the facts of the case. it
is directed that such consideration be made by the Tribunal after hearing
the parties within four months from the date of communication of this
order. The appeal is accordingly disposed of with no order as to cost.
B G.N. Appeal disposed of.
-
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.