Central Administrative Tribunal single bench can hear, dispose of original matters, says HC

Kolkata: Reviewing its own order, the Calcutta High Court has ruled that a single member bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) is competent to hear and dispose of original applications.

The bench of Justices Debangsu Basak and Shabbar Rashidi was moved by the review applicant who is the deputy registrar of CAT, Kolkata Bench. The order under review had held that a single bench of CAT is not competent to hear and dispose of an original proceeding filed before it on merits.

The Additional Solicitor General (ASG), appearing for the applicant, contended there was a mistake on the part of the court in the judgment and order. The review applicant is a party aggrieved by such judgment and order and therefore entitled to file and maintain the review application.

It was argued that an original application can be posted before a single member bench. He contended that a member means both judicial and administrative of a tribunal and it includes the chairman. Consequently, such a bench can decide an original application on merits even if the bench is an administrative member of the tribunal.

The impugned order concerned a private respondent seeking quashing of chargesheet and disciplinary proceedings against him initiated by Railway authorities, apart from other reliefs sought. The CAT chairman had assigned the original application to the single member of the Kolkata Bench. Thus, the order under review curtailed the chairman’s power.

The court observed that an original proceeding can be heard by a single bench when two tests are cleared, one of which is when the original application doesn’t involve interpretation of a statutory provision or rule in relation to the Constitution. The present application didn’t concern any such interpretation.

The court recalled the order under review and placed it for final hearing since merits of such writ petition was not decided as it was disposed of purely on the basis of the court’s understanding of the lack of jurisdiction of a single member to hear an original application.