RA No. 78/2015 in OA No. 1111/2011. Case: Pala Singh Tanck Vs Union of India. Central Administrative Tribunal

Case NumberRA No. 78/2015 in OA No. 1111/2011
JudgesSyed Rafat Alam, J. (Chairman) and Dr. B.K. Sinha, Member (A)
IssueAdministrative Tribunals Act, 1985 - Sections 22(3)(f), 22(f), 23(3)(f); Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) - Order XLVII Rule 1; Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) - Section 114
Judgement DateJuly 21, 2015
CourtCentral Administrative Tribunal

Order:

Dr. B.K. Sinha, Member (A), (Principal Bench, New Delhi)

  1. The instant review application has been filed by the applicant under Section 22(f) of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 read with Rule 17 of CAT (Procedure) Rules, 1987 seeking the following relief(s):--

    (a) afford the applicant hearing on the present review application;

    (b) review its order dated 05.01.2015 in OA No. 1111/201 titled Shri Pala Singh Tanck v. Union of India passed by this Hon'ble Tribunal;

    (c) recall the order dated 05.01.2015 in OA No. 1111/201 and adjudicate the OA afresh after hearing the parties; and

    (D) may also pass any further order(S) as be deemed just and proper to meet the ends of justice.

  2. The grounds urged in support of the instant review application includes non-consideration of all the decisions cited by the review applicant in his written submissions; non-consideration of non-communication of ACRs [para 5 page 4 of the paper book]; adoption of different criteria for assessing suitability of candidates; there exists errors apparent on the face of record that though the applicant was eligible for promotion to Senior Administrative Grade he was not promoted, and that he obtained information under Right to Information Act that his ACRs for the years 2006-07 and 2007-08 were found below benchmark.

  3. We have carefully considered the grounds taken by the applicant in support of the instant review application.

  4. At the outset, we would like to go into the basic issue as to what is the scope of review. We take cognizance of the fact that the Tribunal's power under Section 23(3)(f) of the A.T. Act, 1985 is akin to that of statutorily and judicially recognized powers of the civil courts. This is not a carte blanche authorization given to the courts to re-visit and re-hear cases. It is subject to Order 47 Rule 1 implying that the Tribunal can only review its order/decision on discovery of new and important matter or evidence which the applicant could not produce at the time of initial decision despite exercise of due diligence or the same was not within its knowledge or even the same could not be produced before the Tribunal earlier or the order sought to be reviewed suffers from some mistakes and errors apparent on the face of record or there exists some other reasons which, in the opinion of the Tribunal, are sufficient to review its earlier decision.

  5. In a landmark decision in West Bengal & Ors. v. Kamalsengupta & Anr. [2008(8) SCC 612]...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT